(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Massorah Massoreth Massoretic RabbinicHebrewBible.C.D.Ginsburg.1865.1905.4vols.plus3vols"

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 

We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at http : //books . google . com/| 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



Digitized by CjOOQ LC 




r \ : ? ? 



4 1 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



JACOB BEN CHAJIM EBN ADONIJAH'S 
INTRODUCTION 



THE RABBINIC BIBLE, 

HEBEEW AND ENGLISH; 

WITH EXPLANATOKY NOTES. 



CHKISTIAN D. GINSBUBG, LL.D. 



SttOttb ^bitiott. 



LONDON: 

LONGMANS, GREEN, READER, AND DYER. 

1867. 

C 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



nanpn 

iron* i D»n p apy* 

mSm m^ipaa 

i"Din mr it'x'3«n oidt arnpn mm npp ora rnrnpan 
d»3TO D»3ip»n oy 

n«o*n mm mi diqt nAm m*npD *a ^y 
■nron mtoni .iwa .ninn n*to 

maao naaoi enip net* ama hkd 



jrraxyji nn }Nn»nD 






Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



TO 

FRIEDRICH LUDWIG LEOPOLD HAUSBURG, 
| a&ttwmatelg gnttrifce t\p& SStork, 

CHRISTIAN D. GINSBURG. 



Digits 



zed by G00gle 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



PREFACE, 



Since the publication of the first edition of Jacob b. 
Chajim Ibn Adonijah's Introduction to the Kabbinic Bible, 
with an English Translation, I have spent two years of 
almost uninterrupted study in Massoretic lore. When, 
therefore, called upon to issue a second edition, I deter- 
mined to embody in it as much of the results of my 
researches as was required to elucidate the text and the 
translation. 

The principal alterations in this edition are as follow: 
i. The present text is a reprint of the editio princeps 
(Venice, 1525), which I did not possess at first — carefully 
collated with the editions of 1546-48, 1568, 1617-19, 1619, 
and 1724-27. ii. The text has been carefully punctu- 
ated throughout, iii. The translation has been thoroughly 
revised and improved. iv. The Hebrew and the English 
are printed in parallel columns, so that the book may 
now be used as a help by those who are desirous to 
study Kabbinic Hebrew. v. The Annotations have been 
augmented from forty-two to upwards of a hundred. And 
vi. A life of Jacob b. Chajim has been added, with 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



VU1. 

an account of the Massorah, and a description of a newly 
discovered, and very important, MS. of this ancient critico- 
exegetical apparatus. 

If the Christian literary and scientific public should be 
inclined to manifest that interest in the criticism of the 
sacred text of the Old Testament which scholars have 
always evinced in securing correct texts of profane classics, 
I shall deem it a privilege to devote some years of my 
life to the publication and annotation of this newly disco- 
vered MS. 

For the elaborate Indices, I am to a great extent 
indebted to a friend, whose name I am not at liberty to 
mention. 



Bbooklea, Aigburth Road, 

Liverpool, October, 1867. 



Digits 



zed by GoOgle 



JACOB B. OHAJIM IBN ADONIJAH. 



Very little is known of the life of Jacob ben Chajim Ibn Adonijah, 
who rescued the Massorah from perdition, and for the first time 
collated, compiled, and gave to the world in a printed form the grand 
critico-exegetical apparatus, bequeathed to us by the Jews of olden 
times. Even the date and the place of his birth are matters of 
conjecture, and can only be approximately guessed from the autobio- 
graphical fragments scattered through his writings. 

In his celebrated Introduction to the Rabbinic Bible, which we 
publish with an English translation, he tells us that he was a resident 
of Tunis ; and it is concluded, from this remark, that this ancient city 
was his native place. Hence he is also called TunisL Indeed Furst, 
who, in his work on Hebrew Bibliography, treats on our author under 
the name Jacob b. Chajim, has also a second notice of him under 
TunisL 1 It is, however, to be remarked, that Jacob b. Chajim does 
not call Tunis his native place, but simply says that he resided in it 
and prosecuted his studies therein. 8 Nor must we omit to state that 
he calls himself Jacob Ibn Adonijah, and that this, or simply Ibn 
Adonijah, is the surname by which he is quoted in the writings of his 
learned contemporaries. 8 But though Ibn Adonijah is the more 
correct appellation, we shall not entirely discard the name Jacob b. 
Chajim, because he is better known by ifc in modern days. 

From the fact that Jacob b. Chajim carried through the press of 
the celebrated Daniel Bomberg, at Venice, the complete editions of the 
Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds, in 1520-1523, it may reasonably 

1 Comp. Bibliotheca Judaica, vol. ii., p. 17, with vol. iii., p. 451. 

9 waTcnp Vm nxfi mp toh nymn d^itd! mob to ipro *ft*m pvn *nm w ito, 

nonpn, vide infra, p. 38. 

8 Thns in this Introduction {vide infra, p. 36), and in the Treatise on the Points 
and Accents which is printed in the npper and lower margins of the Massorah finalis, 
he calls himself Jacob b. Chajim b. Isaac Ibn Adonijah frrvmn 'J pmr p D*rr p ipJP). 
Levita, in the poem at the end of the Bible, calls him Jacob [ibn] Adonijah (apjp 
nWN); whilst De Kossi (1513-1577), simply calls him Ibn Adonijah (imTN *]). 
Comp. Meor Enajim, part iii., cap. lix., p. 471, ed. Cassel, Berlin, 1867. 

B 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



be concluded that he was then at least fifty years of age, and that he . 
was born about 1470. Whether his ancestors were among the first 
and second masses of emigrants from Spain, who successively fled 
from that accursed country, to escape the fiery persecution consequent 
upon the successive inflammatory preachings of the fanatical priests, 
Fernando Martinez (March 16 — August 1891), and Vincente Ferrer 
(1412-1414), and settled down in the North of Africa by thousands ; 
or whether they were among the three hundred thousand who were 
expelled from Spain in 1492, is difficult to decide. According to the 
former view, Ibn Adonijah, though of Spanish descent, was born at 
Tunis, whilst according to the latter, he emigrated with his parents 
into this city when about twenty-two years of age. 

Among those whom the cruel edict of Ferdinand and Isabella 
drove from their peaceful homes, and who sought an asylum at Tunis, 
were Abraham Saccutto, the celebrated astronomer and historian, and 
Moses b. Isaac Alashkar, the famous Kabbalist and philosopher. 
These, together with other distinguished literati, established schools at 
Tunis, and taught hundreds of students the different branches of 
Biblical and Talmudic literature. It was among these eminent men, 
and in their schools, that Jacob b. Chajim prosecuted his Hebrew 
studies, and acquired his extraordinary knowledge of the Massorah, 
thus preparing himself for the great work which Providence had in 
store for him elsewhere. 

He was, however, not permitted to continue the enjoyment of his 
quiet home and peaceful studies under the hospitable protection of the 
Crescent. The bloody persecutors under the Cross, not satisfied with 
having deprived the whole Jewish population of Spain of all that is 
precious to men on earth, carried fire and sword, in the name of Christ, 
among the Jews who had obtained an asylum in Mohamedan 
countries, and who were diligently employed in the revival of Biblical 
literature. This time, however, the crusade was not originally 
organised against the Jews, but against the Moors, since it was 
believed to be base ingratitude to the goodness of Providence, which 
had delivered these infidels into the hands of the Church, to allow 
them any longer to usurp the fair inheritance of the Christians. 

Hence no less a person than Cardinal Ximenes, the distinguished 
Archbishop of Toledo, resorted to Granada, in 1449, to convert the 
stiff-necked race of Mohamed ; seeing that the rational and benevolent 
measures adopted by Fray Fernando de Talavera, the Archbishop of 



Digits 



zed by GoOgle 



8 

that province, — who at an advanced age studied Arabic, and caused a 
vocabulary, grammar, and catechism to be compiled, and a version 
of the liturgy to be made in the same tongue, — had produced few 
proselytes. He first employed arguments and presents ; if these failed 
to convince the Mussulman of the error of his ways, imprisonment, with 
fetters, and a few days' fasting, soon humbled the unbeliever ; so much 
so, that the devout Ferreras was constrained to exclaim, " Thus did 
Providence avail itself of the darkness of the dungeon to pour on the 
benighted minds of the infidel the light of the true faith." 4 

Effectually to extirpate heresy, and to preclude the possibility of 
the converts returning to their former errors, Cardinal Ximenes 
caused all procurable Arabic manuscripts to be piled together and 
burned, in one of the great squares of the city, so as to exterminate 
the very characters in which the teachings of the infidels were 
recorded. This outrageous burning of most valuable MSS., relating 
to all branches of science and literature, was effected by the learned 
Prelate at the very time that he was spending a princely fortune in 
the publication of the stupendous Complutensian Polyglott, and in the 
erection and endowment of the university of Alcala, which was the 
most learned in Spain. From the thousands of MSS. destined for 
the conflagration, Ximenes indeed reserved three hundred, relating 
to medical science, for his university. 

As to the Jews, their doom was sealed. In ordinary warfare it 
mattered very little to them whether the Christians vanquished the 
infidels, or the infidels the Christians, since the tribute levied by the 
conqueror upon the conquered was obtained by stripping the Israelites. 
In the present instance, however, they saw that those who won the 
day, and forced their religion by means of the sword upon the 
vanquished, were the very people from whom they themselves had 
suffered in an unparalleled degree ; and that the victors were simply 
re-enacting the same deeds abroad which they perpetrated at home, upon 
those who were out of the pale of the Church. They expected again 
to be dragged from their peaceful homes in the name of Christ, 
as soon as the Spaniards had a respite from the Mussulman infidels. 
Hence when they heard that Ximenes, flushed with success at 
Granada, had instigated Ferdinand, immediately after the death of 
Isabella, to organise an expedition against the neighbouring Moslems 
of Africa, and that Mozarquivir, an important port on the Barbary 
* Prescott, History of the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella, part ii., cap. 6. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



coast, nearly opposite Carthagena, had actually been captured (Sep. 
13, 1505), consternation spread among the numerous Jewish com- 
munities in the cities of North Africa. 

The consternation became still greater when they heard that 
Ximenes, mounted upon a mule, had triumphantly entered Oran (May 
17, 1509), preceded by a Franciscan friar, and followed by a cavalcade 
of brethren of the same monastic order, bearing aloft the massive 
silver cross, the archiepiscopal standard of Toledo, and banners embla- 
zoned with the Primate's arms on one side, and the Cross on the other. 
All their fears were more than realised when, after the return of 
Ximenes to Spain, Pedro Navarro, the general of the army, had 
vanquished -Bugia (Jan. 81, 1510), when Tunis had to capitulate, and 
when they saw the banner of the Cross floating triumphant from the 
walls of almost every Moslem city on the Mediterranean. It was then 
that Jacob b. Chajim, Saccutto, and a host of other eminent Jewish 
scholars were despoiled of their possessions, banished from their 
homes and families, interrupted in their most important works in the 
cause of Biblical literature, and driven to wander in exile. 

For more than seven years (1510-1517) Ibn Adonijah roamed 
about homeless in the different towns of Italy, where at that time 
Hebrew literature was greatly cultivated and patronised by the 
highest of the land; and where popes and cardinals, princes and 
statesmen, warriors and recluses of all kinds were in search of Jewish 
teachers, in order to be instructed in the mysteries of the Kabbalah. 
Whether it was owing to his conscientious scruples, which would not 
allow him to initiate Gentiles into this esoteric doctrine, or to his not 
having been so fortunate in tuition as his contemporary, Elias Levita, 
he had at first to endure great privations during his sojourn in Borne 
and Florence. He at last went to Venice, where the celebrated 
Daniel Bomberg, of Antwerp, had at that very time established his 
famous Hebrew press (1516), and through the exertions of B. Chajim 
Alton, whom he honourably mentions in the Introduction, he at once 
became connected with the printing office. 

The connection of so profound and assiduous a scholar with 
so cultivated and spirited a publisher proved one of the greatest 
benefits to Biblical literature, at the time of the Church's greatest 
need. For whilst the followers of the Prince of Peace were arrayed 
against each other in deadly conflict, to decide by the sword whether 
the Bible alone, or the infallible vicar of Christ on earth, is to be 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



appealed to for the rule of faith and practice, Jacob Ibn Adonijah was 
studiously engaged in the collation of Biblical MSS., in compiling the 
grand critico-exegetical apparatus of the Old Testament, bequeathed to 
us by the Jews of olden times, and in editing it, together with the 
Hebrew Scriptures, the ancient Chaldee paraphrases, and valuable 
Hebrew commentaries, which has contributed more to the advancement 
of Biblical knowledge than all the bitter controversies of Catholics 
and Protestants. 

Before, however, we describe this gigantic Kabbinic Bible which 
has immortalised his name, we have to mention other important works 
edited by him. It has already been remarked, that Ibn Adonijah 
must have taken up his abode at Venice soon after Bomberg esta- 
blished in it his celebrated printing office (1516). For we find that the 
editio princeps of the entire Babylonian Talmud, published by Bomberg 
in 1520-1523, was partly edited by Jacob b. Chajim; and as the 
Talmud consists of twelve volumes folio, the preparations for its 
printing, and the printing itself, must have commenced a considerable 
time before 1520, when a portion of it was published. Hence his 
work and connection with Bomberg must have begun about 1517 or 
1518. This conclusion is confirmed by the feet that, simultaneously 
with the appearance of the Babylonian Talmud, Ibn Adonijah also 
worked at the editio princeps of the Jerusalem Talmud, which he 
carried through the press in 1522-28, as well as at the editio princeps 
of B. Nathan's Hebrew Concordance, which appeared in 1528, and 
over which he must have spent a considerable time. 

His assiduity was truly marvellous. He not only carried through 
the press in three years the first editions of these gigantic works, 
consisting of fourteen volumes folio, closely printed, both in square 
Hebrew characters and Rabbinic Hebrew, and replete with references, 
the very sight of which would astound any one who is not acquainted 
with them; but, within twelve months after the appearance of the 
Concordance, he edited, conjointly with David de Pizzightone, the 
stupendous legal and ritual code of Maimonides, entitled, Mishne 
Thora (min ittPD) = Deuteronomy, Second Law, or J ad Ha-Chezaka, 
(nptnn T) = The Mighty Hand, in allusion to Deut. xxxiv. 12 ; and 
because the work consists of fourteen books (*i* = 14). To this code, 
which appeared in 1524, in two volumes folio, Ibn Adonijah wrote 
an Introduction. 

It is perfectly amazing, to find that the editing of these works, 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



6 

which would of itself more than occupy the whole time of ordinary 
mortals in the present day, was simply the recreation of Jacob b. 
Chajim ; and that the real strength of his intellect, and the vast stores 
of his learning, were employed at that very time in collecting and 
collating MSS. of the Massorah, and in preparing for the press the 
Rabbinic Bible, which is still a precious monument to his vast 
erudition and almost unparalleled industry, and which was the most 
powerful auxiliary to the then commencing Reformation. This 
Rabbinic Bible, which was published in 1524-25, consists of four 
volumes, folio, as follows : — 

I. The first volume, embracing the Pentateuch (mm), begins — 
i. With the elaborate Introduction of Jacob b. Chajim, which we now 
give for the first time with an English translation; 5 ii. An Index 
to the sections of the entire Old Testament according to the Massorah; 
and ill. Ibn Ezra's Preface to the Pentateuch. Then follow the five 
Books of Moses in Hebrew, with the so-called Chaldee Paraphrases of 
Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uzziel, and the Commentaries of Rashi and 
Ibn Ezra, which are given all round the margin ; The Massorah parva, 
which is in the centre between the Hebrew text and the Chaldee 
paraphrase ; and such a portion of the Massorah magna as the space 
between the end of the text and the beginning of the commentaries on 
each page would admit ; for which reason this portion obtained the 
name of Massorah marginalis. 

II. The second volume, comprising the Earlier Prophets (DW3J 
D'31tftO)» i* e», Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings, 
has the Hebrew text, the Chaldee paraphrases of Jonathan b. Uzziel, 
the Commentaries of Rashi, David Eimchi, and Levi ben Gershon, 
the Massorah parva, and that portion of the Massorah magna which 
constitutes the Massorah marginalis. 

HI. The third volume, comprising the Later Prophets (DW3J 
D^nn«), u e. 9 Isaiah, Jeremiah, EzeMel, and the Twelve Minor 
Prophets, has the Hebrew text, the so-called Chaldee paraphrase 
of Jonathan ben Uzziel, the Commentaries of Rashi, which ex- 
tend over all the books in the volume of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah 



8 Fiirst's assertion (Biblioiheca Judaica, iii. 464), that this introduction had been 
translated into English, and published by Kennicott in his work entitled The state of 
the printed Hebrew Text of the Old Testament, Oxford, 1758, is incorrect. Kennicott 
simply published an abridged and incorrect Latin version, from a MS. which he found 
in the Bodleian Library. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



and the Minor Prophets, the Massorah parva, and the Massorah 
marginalia. 

IV. The fourth volume, comprising the Hagiographa (Drains), i.e,, 
the Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesi- 
astes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Chronicles, had the Hebrew 
text; the so-called Chaldee paraphrases of Joseph the Blind; the 
Commentaries of Rashi, which only embrace the Psalms, the Five 
Megilloth (i. e. y Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and 
Esther), Ezra, Nehemiah, and Chronicles ; the Commentaries of Ibn 
Ezra, which only embrace the Psalms, Job, the Five Megilloth, and 
Daniel; the Commentaries of David Eimchi on the Psalms and 
Chronicles ; the Commentaries of Moses Eimchi on Proverbs, Ezra, 
and Nehemiah ; 6 the Commentaries of Levi ben Gershon on Proverbs 
and Job ; the so-called Commentary of Saadia on Daniel ; the Masso- 
rah parva, the Massorah marginalia, and the (W Dinn) Second 
Targnm on Esther. Appended to this volume are — i. The Massorah, 
for which space could not be found in the margin of the text in 
alphabetical order, and which is therefore called the Massorah finalis, 
with Jacob ben Chajim's directions, ii. A Treatise on the Points and 
Accents of the Hebrew Scriptures, embodying the work (nip^n *3T1 
nwum or vpm *&d) of Moses the Punctuator (ppan HtflD "l). iii. 
The variations between the Western and Eastern Codices, or between 
the Jerusalem and Babylonian MSS., called wroiDI *K1"WD pt? ^Bl^n 
or ^>m '31 J>11 bvTW pK *n |*1B> mpon tfhn. And iv. The variations 
between Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali, called x>« ^3 |*3t? TYVMT\ *BlWl 

It is perfectly impossible for any one, but those students who have 
seen the MSS. of the Hebrew Bible, with the Massorah round the 
margin, in a most fantastic manner, who have encountered the difficul- 
ties in deciphering the hieroglyphic signs, the conceited abbreviations, 
the strange forms and ornaments into which the writing of the Massorah 
is twisted, the confusion of the Massoretic notes, &c. ; and who have 
grappled with the blunders which are to be found in almost every 

• The Commentaries on Proverbs, Ezra, and Nehemiah are ascribed, in all the 
editions of the Rabbinic Bible, to Ibn Ezra. That this, however, is incorrect, and that 
they belong to Moses Kimchi, is now established beyond the shadow of a donbt. Comp. 
Reifmann in Literaturblatt des Orients, vol. ii., pp. 750, 751 ; Zion, vol. L, p. 76 ; 
vol. ii., pp. 113-117, 129-133, 155-157, 171-174, 185-188: Frankfort-on-the-Maine, 
1841, 1842. Geiger, Ozar Nechmad, vol. ii., p. 17, &c. ; Vienna, 1857; Kitto's 
Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, 8. v. Kimchi, Moses. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



8 

sentence, to form an adequate conception of the extraordinary labour 
and learning which Jacob Ibn Adonijah must have bestowed, in bringing 
such beautiful order out of such a chaos. His modesty and humility, 
in speaking of the toil, are becoming his vast erudition. 

" Behold,' ' he says, "I have exerted all my might and strength 
to collate and arrange the Massorah, with all the possible improve- 
ments, in order that it may remain pure and bright, and shew its 
splendour to the nations and princes ; for, indeed, it is beautiful to 
look at. This was a labour of love, for the benefit of our brethren, 
the children of Israel, and for the glory of our holy and perfect law ; 
as well as to fulfil, as far as possible, the desire of Don Daniel 
Bomberg, whose expenses in this matter far exceeded my labours. 
And as regards the Commentaries, I have exerted my powers to the 
utmost degree to correct in them all the mistakes as far as possible ; 
and whatsoever my humble endeavours could accomplish was done for 
the glory of the Lord, and for the benefit of our people. I would not 
be deterred by the enormous labour, for which cause I did not suffer 
my eyelids to be closed long, either in the winter or summer, and did 
not mind rising in the cold of the night, as my aim and desire were to 
see this holy work finished. Now praised be the Creator, who granted 
me the privilege to begin and to finish this work." 6 * Such is the 
touching account which Jacob b. Chajim gives us of his labour of love. 

Not less striking is the gratitude which he expresses to Bomberg, 
for having so cheerfully and liberally embarked upon so expensive a 
work. " When I explained to Bomberg," he tells us, " the advantage 
of the Massorah, he did all in his power to send into all the 
countries in order to search out what may be found of the Massorah ; 
and, praised be the Lord, we obtained as many of the Massoretic books 
as could possibly be got. He was not backward, and his hand was 
not closed, nor did he draw back his right hand from producing gold 
out of his purse, to defray the expenses of the books, and of the mes- 
sengers who were engaged to make search for them in the most remote 
corners, and in every place where they might possibly be found." 7 * 

With all our abuse of the Boman Catholics for withholding the 
Bible from the people, and with all our boasted love for the Scriptures, 
neither will the Bible Society with its annual income of £80,000, nor 
will any publisher in this Protestant country of ours, undertake a 
revised edition of that stupendous work which was published in a 

•• Vide in/ray p. 83, &c, 7" Vide infra y p. 77, &e. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



Roman Catholic country , when Luther began to make his voice heard 
in defence of the word of God. Thus it is, that we in the present 
day are still left to the labours of Jacob b. Chajim, though the results 
of modern researches, and the discovery of valuable MSS., would 
enable us to issue a new edition of the critical apparatus of the Old 
Testament, with important corrections and additions, and in a form 
more easily accessible to Biblical students. 

Bomberg, who took the liveliest interest and the greatest pride in 
this magnificent edition of the Bible, got Elias Levita, whose fame as 
a Hebraist was at that time spread not only all over Italy where he 
resided, but over Germany, both among the most distinguished 
dignitaries in the Catholic Church and the great leaders of the 
Reformation, to write an epilogue to the work of his ambition. In 
this poem, Levita celebrates the praises of the munificent publisher, 
"who though uncircumcised in the flesh [t. e. t a gentile], is circum- 
cised in heart," of "the learned Jacob Ibn Adonijah," who carried it 
through the press, and of the unparalleled work itself. 7 Levita was 
then residing at Rome, in the house of his friend and patron, Cardinal 
Egidio de Viterbo, where he was diligently engaged in printing his 
works on the grammar and structure of the Hebrew language, teaching 
the Roman Catholic and Protestant combatants the original of the Old 
Testament, and enjoying the literary society of popes, cardinals, 
princes, ambassadors, and warriors, who were bewitched by the 
mysteries of the Kabbalah, and little thinking of the misfortunes 
which were soon to befall him. 

Within two years of his writing the epilogue to Jacob Ibn Adonijah's 
Rabbinic Bible, and whilst engaged on an Aramaic grammar, the 
Imperialists under Charles V. sacked Rome (May 6, 1527), and in the 
general work of spoliation and destruction, Levita lost all his property 
and the greater part of his MSS. In a most destitute and deplorable 
condition, he left the Eternal city, and betook himself to Venice in the 
same year (1527) ; and Bomberg, at whose request he had written the 
epilogue, at once engaged him as joint corrector of the press and as 
editor. Thus the two learned Hebraists, Jacob b. Chajim and Elias 
Levita, who were the great teachers of Hebrew to the greatest men of 
Europe, at the commencement and during the development of the 
Reformation, now became co-workers in the same printing office. 

7 For the different editions of the Bible, and for the alterations which were after- 
wards made in it, see Kitto's Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, s.v. Rabbinic Bibles. 

C 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



10 

It is more than probable that Levita told Jacob Ibn Adonijah of 
the Aramaic work on which he was engaged, the MS. of which he 
lost in the sacking of Borne, and that this exercised some influence 
on the latter in the choice of his next literary undertaking. For we 
find Jacob Ibn Adonijah, immediately after Levita 's arrival, writing 
"A Treatise on the Tar gum" (Dinnn i>$ 10K»). It is a matter of 
dispute whether this Treatise first appeared in Bomberg's edition of the 
Pentateuch and the Five Megilloth, published in 1527, or in that pub- 
lished in 1543-44, after Jacob Ibn Adonijah' s death. 8 Not possessing 
the editions in question, I cannot state which opinion is the correct one. 

Although no one who is at all acquainted with his assiduity, and 
who knows what an uncontrollable and inextinguishable passion to 
continue therein is kindled in the hearts of those who have embarked 
upon authorship and found their works acceptable, will for a moment 
doubt that Jacob Ibn Adonijah ever would relinquish his literary 
pursuits, as long as he possessed his faculties and the use of his limbs ; 
yet, with the exception of one solitary and incidental reference to his 
work, presently to be mentioned, we henceforth hear nothing more about 
his productions. Furst indeed enumerates no less than fifteen important 
Midrashim and Commentaries on the Bible, which Bomberg published 
in 1543-47, and which he says may have been prepared for the 
press by our author. 9 But this is mere conjecture. I myself possess 
the very editions of some of the works in question, and though 
Cornelius Adelkind and Elias Levita are distinctly stated as having 

8 Comp. the article Jiidische Typographic, by Steinschneider and David Oassel, in 
Ersch and Gruber's Allgemeine EncyMopddie, section ii., vol. xxviii., p. 44, note 32, 
and Professor Luzzatto's Letter (reprinted below, p. 11), and with Furst, Biblioiheca 
Judaica, vol. iii., p. 451. 

9 The works referred to are as follows: — Midrash Rabboth (mil OTO), Venice, 
1545, fol. ; Mechilta (»rfoo), ibid. 1545, fol.; Siphra (*riDD), ibid. 1546, fol. ; Siphre 
(nDD), ibid. 1545, fol.; Midrash Tanchuma (amnan MTITD), ibid. 1545, fol.; Midrash 
Tilim (D^n OTQ), ibid. 1546, fol.; Pisikta Sutratha («m«m MDpDD), ibid. 1546, fol.; 
Elias Mishrachi's Supra Commentary on Rashi's Comment, on the Pentateuch, called 
Sepher Ha-M'izrache (»min 1DD), ibid. 1545, fol. ; Arama's Commentary on the Penta- 
teuch, called Akedath, (mpy), ibid. 1547, fol. ; Ralbag's Commentary on the Pentateuch 
(rmnn Vs :a"Vl), ibid. 1547, fol. ; Abraham Sabba's Kabbalistic Commentary on the 
Pentateuch, entitled Tzeror Ha-Mor (*Yinn nns)» ibid. 1546, fol. ; Nachmanides' Com- 
mentary on the Pentateuch (rmnn p"nn x 7$), ibid. 1548, fol.; Ibn Shemtob's Homiletical 
Commentarg on the Pentateuch (l"BUb rmnn rWYl), ibid. 1547, fol.; Jacob Ibn 
Chibib's Collection of Hagodas, called En Jacob (lp2 "V), ibid. 1546, fol. ; R. Solomon 
b. Abraham b. Aderethe's Theological Answers to Queries (*«"ttnn m"VD), ibid. 1545-6, 
fol. ; R. Moses de Corecy's Homiletical work, entitled, The Major Book on the Com- 
mandments (a"OD), ibid. 1547, fol. (Comp. Biblioiheca Judaica, vol. iii. p. 452.) 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



11 

been connected with them, Jacob's name is not even mentioned. This, 
however, may be owing to the change in Ibn Adonijah's religious 
sentiments, which, as we shall presently see, is more than probable. 

The disappearance of Jacob Ibn Adonijah from the field of active 
labour in connection with Bomberg, which happened almost simulta- 
neously with the arrival of Levita at Venice, and his appointment as 
corrector and annotator of the Hebrew works, is most significant, and 
we believe that it was caused by Ibn Adonijah's relinquishing Judaism. 

It is now established beyond the shadow of a doubt, that this 
eminent Hebraist embraced Christianity about this time. Levita, who 
had occasion to refer to Adonijah, when writing his exposition of the 
Massorah (circa 1537-88), not only speaks of him as dead, but 
intimates that he had avowed the Christian faith some considerable 
time before he departed this life, and hence descends to unworthy 
vituperations against him. Referring to the Massorah, edited by Ibn 
Adonijah, in the celebrated Rabbinic Bible, Levita says, "I have not 
seen anything like it among all the ancient books, for arrangement and 
correctness, for beauty and excellence, and for good order. The com- 
piler thereof was one of the learned, whose name was formerly, among 
the Jews, Jacob. Let his soul be bound up in a bag with holes ! " 10 
This spiteful perversion of a beautiful, charitable, and reverential 
prayer, which the Jews use when speaking of or writing about any 
one of their brethren who has departed this life, in allusion to 1 Sam. 
xxv. 29, justifies us in assuming that Jacob Ibn Adonijah embraced 
Christianity several years before 1537. 

As the statement in question, in Levita's work, was till lately the 
only reference to Ibn Adonijah's having embraced Christianity towards 
the end of his life, the fact was generally unknown, and many of the 
learned Jews doubted whether the passage in Levita really meant to 
convey the idea. Amongst those who doubted it, was the erudite 
Frensdorff. He therefore wrote to the late Professor Luzzatto, asking 
him the meaning of the passage in question, to which he replied as 
follows : n " As to the meaning of Levita's words, which he wrote in 

10 Dn-nDQ 'D^impn noo tai -rom wn vb 'run niDE-ran .onwi 3?2*wrro miDon p« 
>np3 Smm <D^Db irno rrn 'D^iaarro tttn dvid ^-non iimi Tnrm ^dvi o^pwn 
3lp3 TTtta JTYn* VOB3 > rm ap&\ Comp. Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, p. 94, ed. 
Oinsburg. 

11 D^cb to© rm D»mana tttm" mcon nniDob rvrnnn inoipnn iroxo "nmn nn psVi 
ia apr "vd ycrb irovo© paw dn dVnwd "y\pi "vr&i mins wdto *nn apy> mp: Srran 
nrn % d '■proo , > ywrm W3»dw roo rm mn nnm ,«in p »*m— im Ton vraia ' ] cm 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



12 

the poetical Introduction to the Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, • one of the 
learned, whose name was formerly, among the Jews, Jacob. Let his 
soul be bound up in a bag with holes ; ' and your asking me whether 
I believe it to imply that R. Jacob b. Chajim Ibn Adonijah changed 
his religion ; it is assuredly so. This was the reason why I delayed 
replying to your letter, for I was greatly perplexed about this subject ; 
since for a truth, from the import of R. Elias Levita's words in 
question, it is beyond doubt that R. Jacob changed his religion, and I 
was unwilling to publish this strange report about such a learned man 
till I found another witness. Now last year, one of my friends, the 
erudite R. Moses Soave, of Venice, found an edition of the Mishna, with 
the Commentaries of Maimonides and Shimshon b. Abraham, printed 
at Venice (Giustiniani), 1546 ; at the end of Tractate Taharoih was 
written as follows, which I also saw myself with my own eyes : * These 
are the words of the first editor, whose name was formerly, among the 
Jews, Jacob b. Chajim, and who revised the Tractate Taharoth, 
with the Commentary of R. Shimshon, of blessed memory. Since, 
however, the sage said, ' Receive the truth by whomsoever it is 
propounded,' we deemed it proper to print his remarks here.' Now 
is peradventure the lie to be given also to this testimony, or is the 
fact to be established from this witness ? 

" Before this, however, happened, I rejoiced as one that findeth 
great spoil, for I bought a copy of the Pentateuch, with the Targum, 
printed by Bomberg in 1548-44, at the end of which are seven 
pages on the Targum, beginning — * Thus saith Jacob b. Chajim b. 
Isaac Ibn Adonijah,' &c; as I thought from this it is evident that in 
the years 1543-44 he was alive, and was still a Jew ; and how then 



vtr\ -vrrron apr *va pen vfa n*n Van rrbw *i nai rrttmjn 03dn *) mn pya "pas wr 

TVD TTW N20 ma3TO 71W2. oVwi .'3«J TO S3W CHEa IITM DDJ1 W XSh HWlb fWl TPTT 
ri3tt 'ftWTCDV* 7W*P31 D*»D1 «nm D""H 1DTVD D3? nV3ttO 7W3TO TOO '3N1D 7TOQ *l tolDOn 

faw rnw pwnrr rvsan nn on nWw »3» Da >roo pv~p aira-rimo Yrorpoai >rxo, 
bap cann nowo *fr\ .b"i prow im trrvo d? nmio yid rrarro D»n "a apr bNwn cnth 
nwatflan nwtonb tm - nwn nrwn oa ananb pnvi — Ttd vm mrrh mn tor© nan noxn 

won V«n a"» row rcyiya rrsn Diann ds rann TWp *a an bbrc «3nna tito pb D-np *a«i 
y^o *tt TrwawY' )"rro» *"«?» irroN 7 pw p D*n p apr nowonbrrn -winn bs d'ct 'i 
nrrrr naa <mDtan moo 'd Drnrca* n"3n nwi T*n »mrr rrm tt rrn n"un 3"tt> na«n *a 
'D by ^ 'vrpTsw rroai ? vrw rro thdm .V"an nva«on whito baN—?rrvns now 
• mrr rrrroa oia-inn by rrc»na ana vrrw 'j »a pao pit :m&» wi nan rrav ony d»3« 
b*ro Ta -ttW3 ba« .to kto ab a"a ^rwi ->Tb pny »a vtro nrw rcmna rro ddi3 naa *bwi 
m>a Minn nnwan d^dih tni main oy wain d*dttto iy m« nsp aTaraia. This letter 
is published in the Hebrew Essays and Reviews, entitled Ozar Nechmiad, vol iii., 
p. 112, Vienna, 1860. >^ / 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



18 

could his soul long ago be bound up (t. e. have departed) in the year 
1588, when the Massoreth Ha-Massoreth was printed ? But when I 
saw the edition of the Mishna in question, I thought, what am I now 
to say ? and how am I to reconcile it ? Surely upon the testimony 
of two witnesses the man must be executed. Whereupon I concluded 
that Ibn Adonijah wrote his Treatise on the Targum when still a Jew, 
and that it had either been already printed when he was alive, in an 
edition of the Pentateuch which I have not yet seen, or it was not 
printed in his life- time, bit remained for some years in the possession 
of Daniel Bomberg, till he printed an edition of the Pentateuch, 
with the Targum, when he also printed at the end the Treatise in 
question.' ' 

This fact may perhaps give us the clue to Jacob Ibn Adonijah's 
sudden disappearance from the field of labour in connection with 
Bomberg's printing office. The apology of the second editor of the 
edition of the Mishna in question, for printing, in a work intended for 
the Jews, opinions propounded by one who had ceased to be a member 
of the community, seems to imply several things which have hitherto 
been unknown in connection with the life of Ibn Adonijah. We see 
from it — i. That he still continued to work for Bomberg after he 
embraced Christianity. For had Ibn Adonijah revised the Tractate 
of Mishna in question when he was still a Jew, the future editor would 
not have found it necessary to apologise for reprinting Ibn Adonijah's 
opinions ; just as the future editors of the Rabbinic Bible did not 
require to explain why they reprinted his compilation of the Massorah, 
and the Introduction to the Rabbinic Bible, which he wrote when still 
a Jew. ii. The fact that Bomberg' s works were for the Jews, and 
that an apology was needed to be made to them for printing the 
corrections and annotations made by a converted Jew, would of itself 
show the inexpediency of retaining a Jewish Christian on such works. 
To conciliate, therefore, the prejudice of his Jewish customers, Bomberg 
was undoubtedly obliged to part with his old friend Jacob Ibn 
Adonijah. How bitter this prejudice was against those who embraced 
Christianity, may be seen from the vituperations uttered against Ibn 
Adonijah, even by so enlightened a man as Elias Levita. If our 
conclusions are correct, they will also supply us with the clue to the 
sudden and mysterious disappearance of Ibn Adonijah's name from 
nearly all the books printed by Bomberg since the year 1527. 
However much Ibn Adonijah may have done to them by way of 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



14 

correction and annotation, it was the best trade policy to suppress 
the name of the converted Jew. Hence Fiirst may be perfectly 
correct in his supposition that Jacob b. Chajim had a share in pre- 
paring for the press the fifteen important works already alluded to, 
though the learned bibliographer neither accounts for, nor mentions, 
the fact that Ibn Adonijah's name is suppressed. 

The precise year in which Ibn Adonijah died has not as yet been 
ascertained, though it is perfectly certain, from the remarks of Levita 
already alluded to, that he departed this life before 1588. That the 
Jews did not record anything connected with his life and death 
is no matter of surprise, when we remember that he had left their 
community, and that, in their unparalleled sufferings, the converted 
Israelites of those days, in their blind zeal, were considerable 
abettors. But that the Christian writers of those days, both Catholics 
and Protestants, who thought it worth their while to chronicle and 
perpetuate events which we cannot read now without blushing, should 
have passed over in total silence the death of one who had done so 
much for Biblical literature, and suffered the loss of all things to join 
the ranks of the followers of Christ, will remain an indelible blot on 
the gratitude of Christian historians. As far as Ibn Adonijah himself 
is concerned, he has left a monument behind him in his contributions 
to Biblical literature, which will last as long as the Bible is studied in 
the original ; and the critical student of the Scriptures can never examine 
the Massorah, nor look at the gigantic Rabbinic Bible, without feelings 
of reverence for, and gratitude to, Jacob b. Chajim Ibn Adonijah, who, 
being dead, yet speaketh. 

It now remains that we should advert to the materials from which 
Ibn Adonijah compiled the Massorah, and to the merits of his 
compilation. Before, however, this is done, it is necessary to give 
the reader some idea of the origin, development, import, and trans- 
mission of the Massorah. The account must necessarily be very 
succinct. 

Owing to the extreme sacredness with which the letter of the text 
was regarded, and believing that the multifarious legal enactments 
which were called forth by the ever-shifting circumstances of the 
commonwealth, the sacred legends which developed themselves in 
the course of time, and all the ecclesiastical and civil regulations, 
to which an emergency may at any time give rise, are indicated 
in the Bible by a superfluous letter, or redundant word, or the 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



15 

repetition of a phrase, or the peculiarity of a construction, the greatest 
care has been taken, since the beginning of the Christian era, to mark 
every peculiarity and phenomenon in the spelling and construction of 
the words in the Scriptures, so that " one jot or one tittle shall in no 
wise pass from the law." 

The duty of noting these peculiarities devolved more especially 
upon the Scribes, or copyists, who multiplied the Codices of the Bible. 12 
As the collation of MSS. for the purpose of producing correct copies 
was deemed unsafe, inasmuch as the multiplication always gives rise 
to a multitude of errors ; and as, moreover, the process of collation 
is not only tedious, but demands a number of MSS. belonging to 
different families, and various ages, the Scribes found it more practi- 
cable to count the number of times a word was spelled in an 
exceptional way, or a peculiar phrase was used, or any anomaly 
occurred throughout the Bible. The different peculiarities, thus 
numbered, were rubricated, and formed into separate registers and 
lists. These were at first committed to memory by the professional 
Scribes and doctors of the law, and transmitted orally in the schools ; 
but afterwards, like all other traditions, were written down, and now 
constitute the Massorah (miDD), = tradition. 13 

Like the science of grammar and lexicography, the Massoretic 
researches were at first limited. They were confined to the rubrication 
of words and phrases to which some legal enactment was attached, 
or which had some caligraphical and orthographical peculiarity. But 
as the Massoretic schools extended over a millennium, 14 and as the 

12 Hence the remark, rrnnitt rowan ba one*© vn© onDID rwwmn "wp -p'D^ 
ntonm »ro:rn to x^n tro «m <min nDD to nvro« to ]"sn pnan vwi nnni« rmo 
D'piDDi nan p3? -ib^ mm *nm -D»\-in to D"2n ypi ps iw *rcrr nsncny .oyiDD to; 
" therefore are the ancients called Sopherim, because they counted all the letters in 
Holy Writ. Thus they said that the Vav, in pro [Levit. xi. 42], is the half of all the 
letters in the Pentateuch ; XCTM ttm [ibid. x. 16] is the middle word ; nhnm [ibid. xiii # 
33] the middle verse ; that Ain, in "QPn [Ps. lxxx. 14], is the middle letter in the 
Psalms; and Ps. lxxvii. 38 the middle verse." Kiddushin, 80a. 

18 The expression miDD, which now denotes all the labours of the Massorites 
effected during a millennium, is the post-Talmudic form. In the Talmud it is D"nDD 
and originally denoted the traditional pronunciation of the unpointed text. Thus it 
was transmitted authoritatively that D^ltt) (Levit. xii. 5) is to be read D^lti, two weeks, 
and not D^ltf, seventy days; and that ifrfl (Exod. xxiii. 19) is to be pronounced 
a^TO, in the milk, and not ibnil, in the fat. Comp. Geiger, Judische Zeitschrift, vol. 
i., p. 90, Sec. ; vol. iii., p. 79. 

14 This has already been pointed out by Levita ; comp. Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, p. 
137, ed. Ginsburg. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



16 

absence of concordances precluded the possibility of discovering at 
once all the instances in which certain anomalies were to be found, 
the continued exertions of the Massorites resulted, not only in supple- 
menting and completing the already existing rubrics, but in adding 
new registers and lists of words, forms, phrases, and combinations, 
which exhibited the slightest deviation from the ordinary usage. 
Hence the Massorah, in its present development, embraces almost 
everything connected with the external appearance of the text. It 
gives the number of times each letter of the alphabet occurs throughout 
the Bible. It states how many verses there are in each separate book. 
It shows which is the middle letter, which the middle word, and 
which is the middle verse in every book. It registers the majuscular, 
the minuscular, the inverted, the suspended, and the peculiarly 
pointed letters, the anomalous forms and phrases, defective and 
plene, textual and marginal readings, conjectural readings, lexical 
features, &c. 

When the Massorah began to be written down, it assumed a double 
form. The first form of it is more like an index, simply stating along- 
side the margin, against the word which exhibits a certain peculiarity, 
that the word in question is one of such and such a number, possessing 
the same peculiarity, without giving the other words of the same 
rubric. This form assumed the name of Massorah parva (natDp miDD). 
The second is the more extensive form. It not only gives all the 
words which possess the same peculiarity in full, but adds a few 
words, by which each expression is preceded, or followed, so as to 
enable the student to recognise, from the connection, in what book the 
anomaly occurs. This form of it obtained the name of Massorah 
magna, and is written above and below the text. 

As, however, the Massorah constantly increased in bulk in the 
course of time, extending to every phenomenon of the text, and as the 
large dimensions it assumed precluded the possibility of its being 
written entirely above and below the margin of the page to which it 
referred, the different lists, both alphabetical and otherwise, had to be 
arranged according to alphabetical or other order, and chronicled in 
separate works. These books are either called by the general name 
Massoretic Treatises (mDDPI nao), or Ochla Ve-Ochla (rfo&O n^DK). 
The latter appellation the Massoretic Treatises obtained from the first 
two examples, rta>K (1 Sam. i. 9), n^?K1 (Gen. xxvii. 19), in the 
alphabetical list of words occurring twice in the Bible, once without 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



17 

and once with Vav, with which the Massorah begins. 15 It must be 
remarked, however, that in copying the Ochla Ve-Ochla, or the Jktasso- 
rah, the scribes or students did not always transcribe the whole of it. 
Some portions were omitted as being tinimportant, or not being wanted 
by the transcriber ; some were transposed by the students to facilitate 
reference; whilst other portions were added by those who devoted 
themselves to this kind of study. Hence obtained different redac- 
tions, some called by the general name Massoretic Treatises, and 
others by the more specific appellation Ochla Ve-Ochla; hence the 
difficulty of ascertaining the particular redaction meant by the different 
commentators, lexicographers, and grammarians, who quote the Ochla 
Ve-Ochla; and hence too the impossibility of specifying particularly 
the various nameless fragments and forms of the Massorah, used for 
collation in the compilation of this critico-exegetical apparatus, as 
edited by Ibn Adonijah. 

This impossibility of specifying the nameless fragments, which 
Jacob Ibn Adonijah realised in the compilation of the Massorah, has 
recently been construed into a deliberate suppression of the materials 
which he used, and the sources whence he drew his information. Thus 
G-eiger, in showing the importance of the Massorah to Biblical criticism, 
and deploring its neglect by commentators and lexicographers, remarks, 16 
" Acquaintance with the Massorah, and with the numerous MSS. 
which contain it in its various forms, has for centuries become so rare, 
that people did not at all know any more whether the Massorah 
actually existed in former times, in the form of a comprehensive view, 
or whether it has been made into such a form for the first time by 
Jacob b. Chajim, at the end of his edition of the Bible ; and whether 
this whole compilation which he made from the isolated Massorahs, 
both parva and magna, to be found connected immediately with the 

is Levita, who made the Ochla Ve-Ochla the basis of his Massoretic researches, 
plainly declared that it is so called from its beginning words, "lnbnnn 11123 p Nlpin ; 
Ma88oreth Ha-Massoreth, p. 131. We cannot, therefore, understand why the learned 
Dr. Steinschneider should be so anxious to claim the originality of this remark. 
Comp. Geiger's Judische Zeitschrift, vol. L, pp. 316, 317, note 31, Breslan, 1862. 

16 Die SSefanntfdjaft mit tljt, mit ben jaljtteidjen £anbfdjttfUn, toeld^e jfe in iljtet 
vetfdjiebenen ©eftett entljaften, ijl fdjon fcit 3aljtl)nnbetten fo fyatftdj getoctben, baf 
man aat nid)t meljt tomji te, ofc benn hritftid) ftufyet and) bie 2ftaf orafy in bet ©ejlalt 
eincr nmfaffenben Uefcetftdjt exiftirt Ijafce, obet cB jie fo etji »cn 3afoB Ben (Sfyaiim am 
Cfrtbe bet SSiMansga&e geotbnet rootben, biefe aanje 3ufammenjleHung, bie et efcen 
an$ ben veteinjeften nnmitteftat ne&en bem %txk &efhtbtt<$en fteinen unb gtojjen 

D 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



18 

text, is exclusively his work. From his words, with which he intro- 
duces this work, it does not appear whether he had before him one or 
more such compilations, nay, on the contrary, it seems as if he claimed 
for himself this compilation. We can scarcely avoid the suspicion, 
that the man, whose merit is at all events to be acknowledged as 
permanent, designedly intended to envelope it in darkness, with the 
artificial words in which he introduces this work, as well as the 
grammatical Treatise of Moses Ha-Nakden, in order that it might 
scarcely be guessed what he had originally before him, and that it 
should be supposed that he had done far more at it than is actually 
the case ; on the contrary, he would surely have increased his merit if 
he had told very plainly what sources he used, in what form they were, 
and how he had worked them up. Nevertheless he omitted to give 
this information, and the most distinguished literati and collators of 
MSS. could give no information whether there existed any MS. com- 
pilation of the Massorah." 

That this accusation is unmerited, may be seen both from Jacob 
Ibn Adonijah's Introduction, and from the various notes which he 
made in different parts of the Massorah finalis. Thus in the passage 
already quoted, 17 he not only tells us that Bomberg despatched mes- 
sengers to different countries to search for copies of the Massorah, but 
distinctly declares that they succeeded in obtaining as many codices as 
could possibly be secured. These Massorahs, he moreover says, 
embraced both kinds : First, the Massorahs written in the margin of 

2Bafotal) , $ ttotgenmnmen, ausfdjttegftd) fein SBetf fei. 9ln$ feinen SBotten, ntit 
benen et biefe &tbeit etnleitet, gefyt nidjt Ijetttot, oh et etne obet gat meljtete fotdjet 
Uebetjidjten ttotttegen geljafct Ijabe, \a e$ fdjeint im ©egentfyetfe, ate negate ct bicfe 
Sufammenjtettung fur fid) attein in 9lnfytud) ; nut fonnen un$ faum be* 23etbad)tes 
etn>el)ten, bajj bet Sflann, beffen SSetbienft jebenfatfs ein bauetnb anjuetfennenbes iji, 
butd) bie funftfidjen SBotte, mit benen et btefes SBetf, foie ba$ gtammatifdje beg 
SWofe$ J)a*9lafbatt, eintettet, abjidjtttd) ein getoiifeS «&atbbunfe( batubet verBtciten 
tootfte, fc bag man, fca$ tym utfotunglidj ttotgetegen, faum aljnen tonne unb man 
auf bie SBetmutfyung fommen fotte, et ljabe toeit mefyt bafcei getfyan, ate toitflid) bet 
$<dl ijt. @id)et Ijatte et fein SBetbienjl im ©egentfyeite etJjcfyt, foenn et una ted^t 
genan gefagt Ijdtte, foeldje duetfen et benufct, tt>eX<^e ®t$alt biefetben gefyabt unb tote 
et fie setatbeitet. 3ebod) et untetltejj biefe SWittfjetfung, unb bie bebeutenbften 
Rennet unb £anbfd)tiftenfammtei fouften tton bet mag otetljifdjen Uebetjt($t, cb jie 
fyanbfdjttftttd) sot^anben fei f leine 9ladjttd)t $u geben. JMische ZeitschHft fur 

Wwenschaft und Leben, vol. iii., p. 112, &c. Breslan, 1865. 
W Vide supra, p. 8, &c. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



19 

the Bible, thus constituting what is called the Massorah parva and the 
Massorah marginalia; and second, separate Massoretic Treatises, or 
the different redactions of what is called the Ochla Ve-Ochla. 

Equally explicit and straightforward are his remarks about the 
nature of these materials, and the manner in which he elaborated them. 
We cannot do better than give his own description of the condition of 
the Massorahs, written in the margins of the Bibles. "After mastering 
their contents," he says, " I found them in the utmost disorder and 
confusion, so much so, that there is not a sentence to be found without 
a blunder : that is to say, the quotations from the Massorites are both 
incorrect and misplaced ; since in those codices in which the Massorah 
is written in the margin, it is not arranged according to the order of 
the verses contained in the page. Thus, for instance, if a page has 
five or six verses, the first of which begins with 'TON 1 }, and he said ; 
the second with *T|M, and it was told ; the third with ntt, and it is ; 
the fourth with nW*X and he sent ; the fifth with 3^6!, and she sat : 
the Massorah commences with the fourth verse, " the word n*sp;i, occurs 
twenty-two times ;" then follows verse two, " the .word W1, occurs 
twenty-four times ; " and then the fifth verse, " the word 3^81, occurs 
fifteen times," without any order or plan. Moreover, most of these 
[Massoretic remarks] are written in a contracted form, and with 
ornaments ; so much so, that they cannot at all be deciphered, as the 
desire of the writer was only to embellish his writing, and not to 
examine or to understand the sense. Thus, for instance, in most of the 
copies, there are four lines [of the Massorah] on the top of the page, 
and five at the bottom, as the writer would under no circumstances 
diminish or increase the number. Hence, whenever there happened 
to be any of the alphabetical lists, or if the Massoretic remarks were 
lengthy, he split up the remarks in the middle or at the beginning, 
and largely introduced abbreviations, so as to obtain even lines." w 

That this is by no means an exaggerated description of the state 
in which the Massorah, written in the margins of the Bible, was in 
the days of Ibn Adonijah, may be seen from the account given by 
Levita, his contemporary and co -labourer in the same department. 
Levita, who fourteen years later (1588) had to collate it for his 
Introduction to the Massorah, says, " as for the Massorah, written 
round the margin in the Codices, it contains numberless errors. The 
copyists have perverted it, as they did not care for the Massorah, but 

18 Vide infra, p. 78, &c. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



20 

only thought to ornament their writing, and to make even lines, so as 
not to alter the appearance, in order that all the pages should be alike. 
Moreover they ornamented them with illuminations of divers kinds 
of buds, flowers, &c. Hence they were obliged sometimes to narrow, 
and sometimes to widen, the margins round the illuminations with 
words already stated, although they were superfluous, and out of 
place ; whilst the Massoretic registers were entirely omitted from their 
proper place, because the space did not suffice ; and hence they had 
to break off in the middle of a sentence, thus leaving the whole edifice 
incomplete, and greatly defective. 18 * 

Thus much for the Massorah, which accompanied the Codices of 
the Bible, prior to, and after, the time of Ibn Adonijah's compilation. 
As to the means for collating, correcting, and compiling it, and the 
extent of his labours, he distinctly tells us that he used different 
separate redactions of the Massorah, which Bomberg procured, and 
which he himself possessed. Here, again, we must let Ibn Adonijah 
speak for himself. "Now," says he, "when I observed all this 
confusion, I bestirred myself in the first place to arrange all the 
Massoretic notes, according to the verses to which they belonged ; and 
then to investigate the Massoretic treatises in my possession, apart 
from what was written in the margins of the Bibles. Wherever an 
omission or contraction occurred, in order to obtain even lines, or 
four lines at the top and five lines at the bottom, I at once consulted 
the Massoretic treatises, and corrected it according to order. And 
whenever I found that the Massoretic treatises differed from each 
other, I put down the opinions of both sides, as will be found in the 
margin of our edition of the Bible with the Massorah, the word in 
dispute being marked to indicate that it is not the language of the 
Massorah; and whenever I took exception to the statement in a 
certain Codex of the Massorah, because it did not harmonise with 
the majority of the Codices of the Massorah, whilst it agreed with 
a few, or wherever it contradicted itself, I made careful search till I 
discovered the truth, according to my humble knowledge. " 19 

How, in the face of such a plain declaration, that he had used 
sundry Codices of the Massorah, apart from the Massorah which 
accompanied the copies of the Bible, an accurate and profound 
scholar like Geiger could say — "from his words it does not appear 

18 * Mas8oreth Ha-Massoreth, p. 94, ed. Ginsburg, Longmans, 1867. 
19 Vide infra, p. 79, &c. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



ai 

whether he had before him one or more such compilations, nay, on 
the contrary, it seems as if he claimed for himself this compilation," 
and then charge Ibn Adonijah with designedly concealing his original 
sources, is to us a matter of the utmost astonishment. Can it be that 
Geiger has not read through Ibn Adonijah's Introduction to the 
Eabbinic Bible, in which he gives this detailed description of his 
labours? 

The imputation appears still more unaccountable when it is 
compared with the correct account which a few pages before Geiger 
gives of Ibn Adonijah's most assiduous and conscientious work. 
" Jacob b. Chajim," he says, 19 * " has the great merit of having trans- 
mitted to us the Massorah, in the second Bomberg Bible, edited by 
him (1525), after comparing it most carefully with different MSS. 
He has furnished us with a work of the utmost discernment and 
indescribable industry. He has used several MSS. for the Massorah 
parva and magna, endeavoured to reconcile and solve contradictions 
and difficulties ; and has conscientiously given an account of this, as 
well as of his scruples. He must certainly have had before him a 
Massoretic survey, but this he has entirely recast in its arrangement. 
By his not only referring frequently in the large marginal Massorah to 
articles in the survey, but, vice versa, being sometimes satisfied with 
a reference in the latter to the former, he actually also endeavoured to 
make it a complete survey, inasmuch as he has tried to work up the 
whole Massoretic material, in so far as it did not relate to entirely 
isolated details ; and moreover, by arranging it alphabetically, he has 

w# 3af ofc Ben (Sljaitnt Ijat ba$ grofie 93erbtenfi, un$ btefefte in ber tton tijm 
fceforgten 9lu$ga&e ber jtoetten ra&fctntfdjen fBomfcerg'fdjen S3iM (1525), mit 
fcrgfdfttger SBergletdjung fcerfdjtebener £anbfd)rtften, ufcerttefert ju Ijafcen. @r fjat 
un$ em 2Berf clr.^tettofler ^enntntjj unb unfdgftdjen &tetfie$ geftefert ; er fyat fur 
bie Heine unb bu grcfie 2Rajjoralj nteljrere £anbfd)rtften fcenufct, SHjferenjen unb 
<Sd)hriertgfetten ausjugietdjen unb ju Wfen gefudjt, unb gehrifientyaft gtefct er baruBer 
tone ufcer feme ©frupet 93ertd)t. 9lud) bie ntafioretytfdje Uefcerjfdjt fag tijm ftdjerlidj 
fcor ; biefe after arfcettete er in SBctreff ber Slncrbnung ttofljianbtg urn. Sfctdjt fcfo$ 
baf? er in ber grofien SRanbutafioralj tydufig auf &rttfel ber Uefcerftdjt tterhries, 
untgefefjrt jutoetf en in biefer jtd) mit einer SBertoetfung auf bie grofi e SRanbtttajjoraty . 
begnugte, tyat er jte au<$ ttrirfttdj jn einer »ot(jtdnbtgen Uefcerjidjt ju geflalten tterfudjt, 
inbent er ben ganjen tnafj oretljtfdjfjen @toff, fctoett er ntdjt ganj »erem$efte$ detail 
fceiraf, barin ju tterarfcetten fudjte' unb bag er fie ferner alfafcettfdj crbnete, fte alfo ju 
einent tnafjoretljtfdjen Sexifon umgeftolteie, ba$ bie Sluffmbung ber tnajjcretfjtfd$en 
SBejHmtnungen feljr erfetdjterte. $>afi tym £anbfdjriften gu biefer Slrfcett ttorfogen, 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



transformed it into a Massoretic lexicon, so that the finding of the 
Massoretic definitions is greatly facilitated. That he had MSS. before 
him for this work is evident from the whole plan, and especially from 
his frank confession, in separate articles, that the statements are some- 
times contrary in themselves, and sometimes contradict other state- 
ments, and that he leaves the solution. However, the bringing 
together of the separate and scattered stones into a well compacted 
edifice is his work. The arrangement was uncommonly difficult ; he 
had often to hesitate, in the course of his work, in which to put single 
articles ; and this indeed constituted simply a single and subordinate 
part in the great work of a complete edition of the Bible, with Targum 
and a number of Commentaries. " 

From this description, which is irreconcilable with the other, 
wherein Ibn Adonijah is charged with designed concealment of the 
original sources, it is almost certain that Geiger could not have read 
through Jacob b. Chajim's Introduction to the Bible. For here, where 
Geiger is really anxious to do him justice, and where he alludes to 
Ibn Adonijah's materials, he simply refers to his remarks in the 
Massorah finalis, drawing from them his conclusion, and does not 
at all refer to Ibn Adonijah's Introduction, where he most explicitly 
states that he had before him separate Codices of the Massorah. That 
he does not specify these Codices, is owing to the fact that the 
several redactions of the survey of the Massorah, and the fragmentary 
nature of many of the Codices, precluded such a bibliographical 
description. Besides, paleographical and bibliographical descriptions of 
MSS., used in editing a work, belong to modern days. The editors of 
the greatest works, after the invention of printing, and in the days of 
Ibn Adonijah, never thought of giving an account of the materials they 
used up. Cardinal Ximenes, and his co-workers at the magnificent 
edition of the Complutensian Polyglott, gave no account whatsoever of 
the materials and MSS. they used for the texts of the Old and New 

tft au$ ber ganjen Stolaae erftdjtttfy oefonber* fcaraus, bafj er mmmfounben ju 
cingettten SCrtifetn oefennt, baf bte 5lngaoen oaft> in fid) fefljft fcalb wit anbern int 
SBiberfymdj ftetyn, mtb er bie Sofung an^etrnfteKt. OTetn bie Snfammenfdjtdjtnng 
ber einjetnen jerjireuten S3au(ieine ju einem tootylgefugten S3au tft fein 2Berf. £ie 
Sfoorbmmg toar ungemetn fdjtotertg, er wnjjte oft fdjtoanfen, an toeidjer ©teTCe er ben 
einjetnen Slrttfet nnterfcrtngen fotte, int Sonfe ber Arbeit feftft— unb biefette f^fof 
ftdj ja Mo* ate einjelner untergeorbneter Xfjetf an ba$ grofa Sffierf einer »ol(ftdnbigen 
SBtbefouSgafce wit Xtyargnm nnb etner Stajatyt (Somwentare an— anberte er gttoetfen 
feittett $fott. Judiache Zeitachrift, toI. iii., p. 105. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



28 

Testaments ; and Biblical critics have to the present day not succeeded 
in finding out these materials. Yet who ever thinks of charging the 
Cardinal, and the editors of the Complutensian Polyglott, with 
designedly concealing the original sources of their work, in order that 
it might appear greater than it actually was ? 

Levita, who, in referring to the extraordinary dimensions of the 
Massorah magna, tells us that " if all the words of it which he had 
seen in his life were to be written down, and bound up in a book, 
it would exceed in bulk the Bible itself," declares that the greater part 
of Ibn Adonijah's compilation is from the Ochla Ve-Ochla.* Now 
Ibn Adonijah does not even mention the name of this Massoretic 
Compendium ; and it would at first sight seem as if we had here one 
of the original sources, which he had designedly concealed. But the 
fact that Levita found a copy of this treatise, after great exertions, 81 — 
though he lived in the very place where Ibn Adonijah sojourned, and 
was engaged by the very printer who employed Ibn Adonijah, and who 
collected and possessed all the Codices of the Massorah used in the 
edition of the Babbinic Bible, would of itself show that Ibn Adonijah 
could not have had before him this particular redaction when he 
compiled the Massorah. Levita's remark, therefore, simply proves 
that the different redactions of the separate Massorah, or the Ochla 
Ve- Ochla, which Ibn Adonijah worked up in his great compilation, also 
embodied the greater portion contained in the particular redaction 
in question. 

Had the Ochla Ve-Ochla referred to by Levita come to light, we 
should have been able, by comparing it with the present Massorah, 
to see how much of it Ibn Adonijah incorporated in his compilation, 
and in what manner he worked up the materials. But, unfortunately, 
this Codex, like all other Massoretic compilations, has disappeared. 
Th&re can, however, be no doubt that Levita's statement is exag- 
gerated, and that, from his known enmity to Ibn Adonijah for having 
embraced Christianity, he would only too readily seize any plausible 
opportunity of depreciating his fellow-labourer's work. Yet even he 
was constrained to bestow the greatest praise upon Ibn Adonijah's 
compilation, and to account for its deficiencies by adducing the ancient 
proverb that " every beginning is difficult." ® 

The few independent surveys of the Massorah, which have of late 

20 Ma88oreth Ha-Massoreth, p. 138, ed. Ginsburg. 
ai Ibid, p. 93. 22 IM^ p . 95, & c . 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



24 

years been discovered in public libraries, only snow how vast Ibn 
Adonijah's labours must have been in producing Iris compilation. 
For, not only do these MSS. exhibit the greatest diversity in details, 
but not a single one of them can be compared, in number of rubrics 
or in point of arrangement, with the present Massorah finalis. About 
the relationship of the Great Massorah, which the celebrated E. 
Gershom b. Jehodab (circa 960-1028), " the luminary of the 
dispersed," already copied with his own hands, 28 and which is 
frequently quoted by Bashi, and by the transcribers of the Leipsig 
Codex (No. 1), with Ibn Adonijah's compilation, we can say nothing, 
since no Codex of this particular redaction of the Great Massorah 
has as yet been found. We can, however, speak positively about the 
recently discovered and published Ochla Ve-Ochla. 

The Ochla Ve-Ochla, as has already been remarked, is the name 
which in the course of time was given by some to one or more 
redactions of the independent survey of the Massorah, to distinguish 
it from the other Great Massorah, 2 * which was written above and 
below the text of the Bible. By this appellation, this particular 
redaction of the Great Massorah was first quoted, towards the end 
of the twelfth century, by David Kimchi, 25 and Ibn Aknin. 26 It is then 
quoted again by Isaac b. Jehudah, in the middle of the thirteenth 
century j 27 and then again by Levita in 1538, who describes it as the 
only separate Massorah. 28 Henceforth it entirely disappeared. Even 
B. Salmon Norzi, the great Biblical critic, and Massoretic authority 
(circa 1560-1630), who wrote his celebrated critical and Massoretic 

38 Comp. Delitzsch, Catal. Codd. Lips., p. 273; and also Zunz, Additamenta, 
to Delitzsch's Catalogue, p. 815, where the passages are given in which Bashi quotes the 
" Great Massorah." 

24 Hebrew, rfrm miDD .rbnyn mioo ; Chaldee, »nn wvvidq .wren wmoo. Vide 

supra, p. 16, &c. 

25 Kimchi quotes the Ochla Ve-OcMa in his grammar, entitled MicMol, 35 b, col. 2 ; 
51a , col 2 ; ed. Levita, Bomberg, 1545, fol. ; or 112 b, 163 a, ed. Hechim. Furth, 1793 ; 
and in his Lexicon, s. v., lip. 

26 For Ibn Aknin's quotations, which are to be found in his ethical work entitled 
D"»D3b» 1!D, and in his Methology, see Steinschneider, in Geiger's JudUche Zeitschrift, 
vol. i., p. 316, note 31, Breslau, 1862. 

27 The work in which Isaac b. Jehudah quotes the Ochla Ve-OcMa is entitled 
town *®D. Comp. Steinschneider, Catdlogus Libr. Uebr., in BibliotJieca Bodhiana, 
col. 1418; the same author in Geiger's Jildische Zeitschrift, vol. i., p. 317, note; 
Graetz, Geschichte der Juden, vol. v., p. 555, note, Magdeburg, 1860 ; and see also 
Neubauer, Notice sur la Lexicographic Htbraique*, p. 9. Paris, 1863. 

28 Comp. Massoreth Ha-Massoreth , pp. 93, 94, 138. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



25 

Commentary on the Hebrew Bible, about half a century later could no 
longer find it; 80 and such distinguished scholars as Lebrecht and 
Fiirst have pronounced it as lost. 80 Dr. Derenburg, however, whilst 
preparing the catalogue of Hebrew MSS. in the Imperial Library, at 
Paris, had the good fortune to discover an independent " Great 
Massorah," commencing with the words Ochla Ve-Ochla* 1 Shortly 
after, Dr. Frensdorff, who has for years been engaged in Massoretic 
studies, heard of the discovery (January, 1869), and, with the zeal 
and disinterested love with which this author prosecutes his Massoretic 
researches, he went to Paris in 1862, copied the MS., and published 
it, with learned annotations, in 1864. 88 

The questions which we now purpose to examine are — i. What 
relationship does this Massoretic work sustain to the Massorah, 
published by Ibn Adonijah? And, ii. Is this Ochla Ve-Ochla the 
identical work which is quoted by Kimchi, Ibn Aknim, Isaac b. 
Jehudah, and Elias Levita, or is it simply one of the redactions of 
the ancient Great Massorah, which, like the several other redactions, 
obtained the appellation Ochla Ve-Ochla? 

i. The first great difference between the Ibn Adonijah compilation 
and the Ochla Ve-Ochla is that the former contains upwards of 
six thousand one hundred rubrics, whilst the latter only contains 
about four hundred, ii. Though Ibn Adonijah's compilation com- 
prises more than fifteen times the number of rubrics that the 
Ochla Ve-Ochla contains, yet the latter has no less than fifty-three 
entire rubrics which are not at all to be found in the former. 
They are as follows, according to the numbers of the Ochla 
Ve-Ochla : — Nos. Ii., lx., lxviii., lxxiii., lxxiv., lxxviii., clxxv., 
clxxvi., cxxx., clxxx., clxxxi., clxxxii., clxxxiii., clxxxix., ccii., ccvii., 
ccxvi., ccxx., ccxxiii., ccxxiv., ccxxv., ccxxvi., ccxxix., ccxxxii., ccxxxiii., 
ccxlii., cclvii., cclviii., cclxiii., cclxv., cclxvii., cclxxxi., cclxxxii., 

29 See the edition of the Hebrew Scriptures, with his Commentary, entitled, A Gift 
Offering, or Oblation of Salomon ben Jehudah (>"« nron), 1 Sam. i. 9, vol. ii. p. 27 6. 
Mantua, 1742-44. 

80 Thus Lebrech, in the Introductory notes to his edition of Kimchi's Lexicon, 
remarks, " sed posquam tota argumentorum ejus summa in Masoram magnam bibliorum 
rabbinorum transit t, ipse liber periisse videtur, p. xlix., Berlin, 1847 ; and Fiirst, ifftN TDD 
"tiriND 12MV rw-01 "Oi rwiDD TED »im nfaw.— Appendices to his Concordance, p. 1382. 

81 Bibliotheque Imperiale, Ancien Fonds Hibreu, No. 56. 

82 The complete title of the book is Das Buck Ochla W Ochla (Massora) Heraus- 
gegeben Hbersetzt und mit erlduterenden Anmerkungen versehen nach einer, soweit 
behant, einzigen, in der Kaiserliehen Bibliotheh zu Paris bejmdlichen ffandschrift. — 
Von Dr. S. Frensdorff, Hanover, 1864. 

£ 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



26 

cclxxxiii., cclxxxiv., cclxxxvi., cclxxxvii., ccxciv., ccci., cccvi., cccvii., 
cccviii., cccix., cccxvii., cccxxix., cccxxx., cccxxxi., cccxlii., cccxlix., 
ccclx., ccclxviii., ccclxx., and portions of three rubrics, Nos., xviii., 
cclxvi., and cccxxvii. 83 iii. Some of the parallel rubrics in the one 
have occasionally a few instances less than the other, and vice versa. 
iv. The order in which the instances are enumerated in the respective 
rubrics is more confused, and less in accordance with the sequence of 
the books in the Bible in Ibn Adonijah's compilation, than in the 
Ochla Ve-Ochla. In the Ochla Ve-Ochla the order of the books is 
as follows: Pentateuch, earlier Prophets as usual, then Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the Minor Prophets; the Five Megilloth are 
sometimes placed before the Psalms, and sometimes before Chronicles ; 
sometimes, however, they follow irregularly immediately after the 
Hagiographa. 

With these important differences between the two redactions of 
the Massorah, we turn to the second question, viz., whether the Ochla 
Ye- Ochla now published by Dr. Frensdorff is the identical redaction 
referred to by the different lexicographers and expositors, and declared 
by Levita to have been used by Ibn Adonijah for his compilation. 
Dr. Frensdorff, the learned editor of the Ochla Ve-Ochla, maintains 
that it is the identical Massoretic work which had been lost for nearly 
three centuries. Levita, who, as far as can be ascertained, was the 
last that possessed a copy of the Ochla Ve-Ochla, and who had studied 
it most carefully, distinctly maintains that the greatest part of Ibn 
Adonijah's compilation, L e., of the present Massorah finalis, is taken 

88 Frensdorff also marks Nos. ccxxxix. and cclix., as wanting in Ibn Adonijah's 
compilation. But this is a mistake, as Gteiger has already pointed ont, since rubric 
ccxxxix., which gives three groups of words, respectively occurring three times in the 
same section, the first time with Vav conjunctive, and the second and third times 
without it. is also to be found in the Massorah finalis. p. 28 b, cols. 1 and 2, ed. Buxtorf 
or Frankfurter. Only that the- Codex from which this rubric of the printed Massorah 
was taken, had erroneously four such groups, and that this error has been transferred 
into the Massorah finalis. For nj? cn*0 which is quoted as occurring twice, once 
beginning with \-ran (read Tram), and once beginning with nnDD ^M, occurs only once, 
and the two references are to one and the same verse, Isaiah xlviii. 8. The other rubric, 
No. cclix., which gives nine instances of two combined words, the first of which occurs once 
only with the prefix Mem, is to be found complete in the Massorah finalis, under the 
letter Mem, p. 43 6, col. 4, ed. Buxtorf or Frankfurter, where, however, moon WO, 
the reference to Jeremiah xxxix. 14, is erroneously put for m&nn WTO, as the Paris 
redaction rightly has it. It is to be added, that in enumerating the rubrics in the Paris 
redaction, which are wanted in the printed Massorah, Geiger has omitted Nos. li., lx., 
cxxx., ccxix., and cclxv., marked by Frensdorff in his notes on the respective articles. 



Digits 



zed by G00gle 



27 

from it. 84 Now the most cursory comparison of the two works will 
show, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that Ibn Adonijah could not 
have had before him the redaction of the Ochla Ve- Ochla, published 
by Dr. Frensdorff; and that either this Ochla Ve- Ochla is not the one 
which Levita made the principal basis of his Massoretic studies, and 
which is quoted by Eimchi, Ibn Aknim, &c, or that Levita's statement 
is not true. 

Indeed, Dr. Frensdorff himself admits that the Ochla Ve- Ochla, 
which has recently been found in the Imperial Library at Paris, and 
which he has published, could not possibly have been used by Jacob 
Ibn Adonijah. We cannot do better than give Dr. FrensdorfFs own 
proofs for this statement: i. The Ochla Ve- Ochla has fifty-six articles 
which are wanting in Ibn Adonijah's compilation, and which he surely 
would not have omitted if he had had this redaction before him ; and 
ii. Some of the articles, which are to be found in the two Massorahs 
alike, are very defective in the printed Massorah finalis, thus showing 
that Ibn Adonijah did not copy the articles into his compilation from 
this redaction of the Ochla Ve- Ochla, or the articles in the copy would 
have been as complete as those in the original. 

Thus under the alphabetical list of words which begin with Vav and 
Mem, and occur only once, Ibn Adonijah remarks, "the above registers, 
which begin with £1 in alphabetical order, from ND1 to tal, have all 
been collected from several Massoretic treatises, piece by piece. There 
is, however, a large alphabetical list of them complete, from kdi to 
HD1 ; but he has not been able to procure it complete, except from tai 
to nDL The rest he has had to search out register by register, and he 
does not know whether it is complete or defective." M If Ibn Adonijah 
had before him the Ochla Ve- Ochla, published by Dr. Frensdorff, he 
would have found this complete list in No. xviii. Moreover, from this 
list, which occurs in the list in the Ochla Ve- Ochla, he would have 
been able to fill up many a gap which occurs in the list of the 
Massorah finalis, from $01 to ntDV 

Constrained to admit that Ibn Adonijah could not have had this 
redaction of the Ochla Ve- Ochla before him when compiling the 

84 *onrr iddd mS* iyn tm "man m»i onron svo^am no nDD-wn rrnDon to 02 
Massoreih Ha-Massoreth, p. 138, ed. Ginsburg. 

86 to '-©on +1BOQ ,v rajA 7into 'b iy\ 'ho n"»n not pttotten itdwi Vjm ta pnyon *o* 
dm o "irra twdd rmb Tin w rnn TO 'mdi rwowi nn» nVna i"» nVo n»n biw <d«j "VJft a«> 
V"3* vh w "ton DM wv «Vl mora mDtt> "WDpb "iNirl Y s n Ijn bo. Comp. Massorah finalis, 
p. 44 a, col. 3. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



28 

Massorah, and yet anxious to maintain that it is the identical Ochla 
Ve-Ochla which is quoted by Kimchi, Ibn Aknin, and others, which 
Levita made the basis of his Massoretic labours, and which he 
positively declares yielded to Jacob b. Chajim the greatest part of his 
compilation, Dr. Frensdorff simply disputes Levita's statement. But 
so plain a declaration by a contemporary scholar, and the first 
Massoretic authority of his time, is not to be set aside. Indeed, 
Dr. Frensdorff would never have resorted to so desperate and hazardous 
a measure, had he not started from the false hypothesis, that there 
was only one redaction of the Ochla Ve-Ochla, and that his was the 
unique copy which has survived the ravages of time. The incorrect- 
ness of this assumption, however, is now proved beyond the shadow of 
a doubt, by the discovery of another and much larger redaction of the 
Ochla Ve-Ochla than that published by Dr. Frensdorff. The MS. is in 
the Library of the University of Halle (Y. b 10), and a description of 
it, by the late Professor Hupfeld, has just appeared in the Journal 
of the German Oriental Society. 86 This description we recast and 
condense, so as to adapt it for our purpose, in order to show its 
relationship both to Ibn Adonijah's compilation, or the Massorah 
finalis, and to the Ochla Ve-Ochla, edited by Dr. Frensdorff. 

The Halle MS., which is a small quarto on parchment, beautifully 
written in square Hebrew characters of the middle ages, consists of 
188 numbered leaves, or 276 pages, and contains upwards of 1,000 
Massoretic rubrics, in two parts, as follows : — 

The Fibst Pabt wants six leaves of apparently a grammatical 
import. On p. 7 a stands, after the superscription htTW 1 *dSd |D*D, a 
table of the accents, with their respective figures and names ; and on 
p. 7 6-11, an Index (7 b-11), of the Rubrics contained in both parts. 
The Massorah proper of the first part, which contains one hundred 
and seventy rubrics, begins on p. 12 and extends to p. 72, thus 
embracing sixty-one leaves, or one hundred and twenty-two pages. 
The rubrics of this part, which contain almost exclusively the 
essence and older portion of the Massorah, viz., lists of words, 
forms, and constructions of a unique nature or rare occurrence, are 
divisible into three groups. The first group consists of seventy, 
nearly all alphabetical lists (1-70) of words, forms of words, and 
combinations, which occur once only, or a few times, partly alone, and 
partly with certain prefixes, with this or that vowel or accent. The 

86 Comp. Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlandischen GeseUscha/t, vol. xxi., pp. 
201-220. Leipzig, 1867. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



29 

second group consists of eighty lists (71-150), giving the various 
readings, and thus being to a certain extent of a critical nature. Of 
these, the first two lists only are still alphabetical, the others are 
incomplete alphabets. The third group consists of twenty lists 
(151-170), of a similar import to those in the first group. Besides 
the rubrics, there are a great number of marginal additions throughout 
this part. They are written both in small square and in Rabbinic 
characters. Some of these simply continue the statements in the 
text, or supplement the examples adduced ; but most of them contain 
new lists, so that the total number of lists in the first part amounts to 
upwards of 260. 

The Second Pabt extends over fol. 73-128, as well as over an 
unnumbered folio, thus making together fifty-seven leaves, or one 
hundred and fourteen pages, and contains three hundred and forty- 
three rubrics, which are again divisible into groups. The first 
group consists of eighty-eight lists (1-88), of forms of peculiar verbs 
and nouns, just as a concordance. The second group consists of twenty- 
one registers (89-109), of textual phenomena, similar to those enume- 
rated in the first part. The third group consists of forty -five rubrics 
(110-155), of words, which are unique in one book only, which are 
peculiar in their orthography, vowel points, or terminations. The fourth 
group consists of a hundred and eighty-eight registers (156-344), 
giving forms and textual peculiarities of all sorts. Besides these num- 
bered ones, there are two lists, one between Nos. 113 and 114, and the 
other at the end, which are not numbered, so that the total sum of 
rubrics in this part is three hundred and forty-five. To this must be 
added a large unnumbered piece, extending over six pages, designated 
ni^D> and giving one hundred and thirty short rubrics, between 
Nos. 279 and 280. There are, moreover, in this part, a much larger 
number of marginal additions than in the first part. They are to be 
found on almost every page, and the additional rubrics amount to 
upwards of a hundred and eighty ; so that the total number of rubrics 
in the second part amounts to upwards of five hundred and twenty. 

Immediately after the second part, p. 129 a, are registers of the 
numbers of verses in the Old Testament, the chronology of Biblical 
events, and the respective authors of the sacred books. Whereupon 
follow, pp. 129 b- 132 b, sundry Massoretic remarks, which, though 
under the inscription flJBpn mDDD IT, this is from the Massorah parva, 
consist mostly of lists of peculiar forms, orthography, and phrases 
strictly connected with the Massorah magna. These lists, some of 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



80 

which already occur in the marginal notes, make together about two 
hundred and fourteen. Then follow, on two unnumbered half leaves, 
thirty-four rubrics, written in Rabbinic characters, of forms and phrases 
with peculiar points and orthography, and of verses containing certain 
words. And, finally, there are other pages (pp. 135 a -186 a) of lists, 
written in Rabbinic characters, giving the passages throughout the entire 
Old Testament where P attach (Segol) is to be found with Aihnach and 
Soph Pasuk. The Appendix, therefore, contains (214 + 84 = ) 248 addi- 
tional rubrics, thus making the sum total upwards of a thousand rubrics. 

It now remains that we should point out the relationship of this 
redaction of the Ochla Ve-Ochla, or the great Massorah, both to 
Ibn Adonijah's compilation, and to the redaction published by Dr. 
Frensdorff. 

i. The Halle MS., though rich in its Massoretic lore, has incom- 
parably fewer rubrics than Ibn Adonijah's compilation. 

ii. In several instances where the arrangement and superscription 
of the rubrics in Ibn Adonijah's compilation differs to advantage from 
the Paris redaction, edited by Dr. Frensdorff, the Halle MS. agrees 
with the printed Massorah. Thus the Massorah marginalis, on Levit. 
i. 1, in giving the alphabetical lists of words which occur once only 
with Kametz, instead of Pattach, adds the important designation, 
NBpTl with Zakeph. The Halle redaction, where this rubric is No. 
22, has the same addition, whereas in the Paris redaction, where it is 
No. 21, this definition is omitted. Again, the rubric of the verses 
giving the names of the Canaanitish nations, has the inscription in 
the Massorah finalis, "two groups of three verses each in which 
the six names, viz., the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the 
Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, follow in the same order ; 
in fourteen verses they have a unique order, making together twenty 
verses," 87 distinguishing two features, first the order of the Canaanitish 
nations, and second the absence of the Vav. In accordance with this 
the two groups are first enumerated, whereupon follow the instances, 
in each one of which the order is peculiar, 88 mostly in pairs. After 
this follow two other rubrics, with separate inscriptions, giving the 
variations of Vav, &c. The Halle redaction has the same arrangement, 

87 ayiDD i"» ^Diivn ^nr\ men noun >nnn wzin tfm i fo pna rv» 'a p p*n ' i p "in 

D*pDD '3 pnVo jnTPDI. Compare that portion of it entitled Various Headings 
(riMnp *DlVn), p. 626, ed. Frankfurter, or ed. Buxtorf. 

88 There are properly only twelve instances, Exod. xiii. 5, and Josh. xxiv. 11, being 
omitted. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



81 

with the same examples, only without the inscription of the last 
rubric ; whilst the Paris redaction, edited by Dr. Frensdorff (rubric 
274) mixes up both the order of the Canaanitish names and the 
absence of the Vav in one rubric, with the inscription, " twenty verses 
in which the sequence of the words is irregular ; fourteen of them 
have each a peculiar order, and also those which have Vav, and those 
which have not Fav. 89 " 

iii. In many instances where Ibn Adonijah's compilation is defec- 
tive and incorrect, and the Paris redaction is correct, the Halle 
redaction has the same blunders as the printed Massorah. Thus in the 
alphabetical list of words which occur once only with the preposition 
/$, and once with the preposition ??, the Massorah finalis gives three 
incorrect instances, viz., HW©n 7V f rD K7» ?N, and l^p ?N, which do 
not occur, and which are rightly wanting in the Paris redaction; 40 
whilst the Halle redaction has the same errors. In the alphabetical 
list of words occurring twice, once with the article n> and once 
without it, the Massorah finalis erroneously gives *intcn bl§n, inasmuch 
as it not only occurs in the passage adduced (Exod. xxix. 29), but also 
in Levit. xiv. 12. This error, which does not occur in the Paris 
redaction, 41 is also to be found in the Halle MS. The printed Mas- 
sorah, in the incomplete alphabetical list of words which respectively 
occur, once with Daleth, and once with Resh, erroneously places 
*"IBJ1 under the letter Pe, instead of Vav, which is also the case in 
the Halle redaction ; whilst in the Paris redaction it is in its right 
place. 42 The alphabetical list of words beginning with 01, and 
occurring only once, to which reference has already been made, 48 is 
exactly as imperfect in the Halle redaction as it is in the Massorah 
finalis. The other instances, adduced by Hupfeld, which exhibit the 
agreement in the imperfections between the printed Massorah and the 
Halle MS., we must omit for want of space. 

As to the relation of the Halle MS. to the Paris redaction, the 

8 » 1 'r\ |»aoa vbi flm V*n pon pfc pioi prro pree "i"> pro pnnran oyiDD '3. 

Compare rubric 274, p. 53, &c. ; 149, ed. Frensdorff, Hanover, 1864. 

40 Compare Massorah finalis, letter Aleph, p 7 b, with the Paris redaction, rubric 2, 
p. 3, &c, notes. 

* Compare Massorah finalis, under letter He, p. 21a, col. 3, with the Paris redaction, 
rubric 3, p. 4, notes. 

** Compare Massorah finalis, under letter Daleth, p. 196, col. 1, with Paris redac- 
tion, rubric 7, p. 6. 

48 Vide supra, p. 27. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



32 

following striking points must be adduced. Apart from the fact that 
the Halle redaction has nearly treble the number of rubrics, the one 
having upwards of a thousand, the other scarcely four hundred, 
a comparison of the materials which these two Massorahs contain in 
common will show that they both proceeded from the same ancient 
source, and have been so elaborated, curtailed, expanded, and adapted, 
as to meet the special requirements of the respective redactors. Before, 
however, we proceed to point out this connection, it is necessary to 
remark that the essential portion of the Massorah, which treats on 
the forms of the words, and gives the number of times these forms 
occur, is divisible into two parts. The one specifies only the excep- 
tional or rare forms, which occur once, twice, thrice, or at most four 
times, grouping these together according to analogies, or parallels, or 
alphabetical lists, or in certain numbers. The other part gives the 
number of times certain words occur, and assumes the form of a 
concordance. The Paris redaction is devoted more especially to the 
first part, whilst the Halle redaction embraces both parts. It is by 
comparing that part of the Halle redaction which rubricates the 
anomalies catalogued in the Paris redaction, that we can see the 
affinity of the two. 

Now on comparing the first part of the Halle MS. with the Paris 
Massorah, it will at once be evident that both the redactors had the 
same materials before them. The first list in both begins with the signi- 
ficant words Ochla Ve-Ochla. The first great group of alphabetical 
lists and pairs of forms which occur once or twice only, contained in 
the first part of the Halle redaction (Nos. 1-70), is to be found in the 
Paris Massorah entirely, and in the same order, with the exception 
that No. 13 of the former stands as No. 70 in the latter. The same 
is the case with the second group of the Halle MS. (Nos. 71-150). 
These are almost entirely to be found in the Paris redaction, only that 
rubrics 71 and 72 in the Halle, are rubrics 80 and 81 in the Paris 
Massorah ; and that the latter contains alphabetical, and a few other 
lists from 82 to 90, so that the parallel sequence is resumed with 
rubric 91; rubrics 73-150 of the Halle MS. having their corres- 
pondence in rubrics 91 - 166 of the Paris redaction. In this group, 
however, the Halle MS. has ten rubrics in the orthography of certain 
words, 44 which are wanting in the Paris Massorah, whilst the latter has 

** These rubrics are on the orthography of WOT13 »m »Hto .rite ,TEi) »Min and NTT, as 
well as on >to2, 'ipso. "pT- To this may also be added the contrast (^Vjn), to rule 151 , 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



88 

about thirteen rubrics (161, 167-170, 176-181, 214, 216-218), 
which are wanted in the former. Rubric 180, however, of the Paris 
redaction, is to be found in the marginal additions of the Halle redac- 
tion, and rubric 214 stands as rubric 168, second part of the Halle 
MS. Greater differences between the two redactions occur in the third 
group of the Halle MS. (151-170), though the bulk of this group is 
also to be found in the Paris redaction. Thus Nos. 155-161 are 
in the latter 76-78, 86-89, 848, 850-858. The corresponding 
portion in the Paris Massorah, however, is much richer, having lists of 
logical deductions (182-184); textual phenomena (192-194, 268, 
278-295) ; registers of expressions repeated in the same verses 
(296-865) ; and of unique forms and combinations (254-267, 366- 
878), which are not found in the Halle MS. The latter again has 
two lists of anomalies in the Divine names and their various combina- 
tions (152-164); five catalogues of $b and #fyi (162-167), and 
other things which do not exist in the former. 

The real difference, however, is to be seen in the second part. 
Here the Halle MS. is much richer than the Paris redaction. Thus, 
for instance, the latter wants the whole of the second group (Nos. 
89-108), and has only three rubrics of the one hundred and eighty- 
eight which constitute the fourth group (156-844) in the Halle 
MS., viz., those which are in the Halle MS. Nos. 163, 277, 827. 
These are in the Paris redaction Nos. 214, 869, 191. Moreover 
the one hundred and thirty short rules which stand after No. 279 in 
the Halle MS., are also wanting in the Paris redaction. Of all the 
rules which are to be found in the marginal glosses and in the 
Appendices, with the exception of the marginal notes on the first 
group of the second part (Nos. 1-88), only about fifteen occur 
in the Paris redaction. Altogether the Paris redaction has about 
fifty rubrics which are not to be found in the Halle MS., as well as 
about fifty lists of words which occur in the same verse. Moreover, 
of the twenty-four rubrics in the Appendix to the Paris Massorah, the 
Halle MS. has only two rubrics, viz., 28 and 24. The Halle MS., 
on the other hand, has at least five hundred rubrics which are not to 
be found in the Paris redaction. 

As to the age of the Paris redaction, this cannot be ascertained 
even approximately. All that is known for certain is that several hands 

which properly begins the third group, giving a list of 154 instances wherein *rw occurs 
in contrast to WIN, and which, too, is wanted in the Paris redaction. 

P 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



84 

worked at it, and that it could not have been compiled earlier than the 
twelfth century. This has been shown by Geiger, who refers to No. 
216. Here three words are rubricated, which in an exceptional 
manner have Chirek followed by Jod before Dagesh, viz., HDI^D? (Isa. 
xlii. 24), VnYlf a (Psalm xlv. 10), and nnp^ (Prov. xxx. 17)! Now 
Geiger shows that these readings were not fixed till the tenth century, 
and that E. Saadia Gaon (892-942), was the first who rubricated 
them, since Eashi (1040-1105), in his commentary on Psalm xlv. 10, 
mentions to have seen them in E. Saadia's Nikkud (nHJJD 3*nipj)« 
From this, it is evident that this rubric was not in the Massorah in 
the twelfth century, and that it was inserted afterwards, since this 
celebrated expositor, who so frequently quotes the Massorah in his 
explanations of anomalous readings, would surely in this instance not 
have referred to E. Saadia's Nikkud, had the rubric in question then 
formed part of the Massorah. As the compilers of the Paris redaction 
made their compilation from Massorahs which already contained this 
rubric, it must at least have been effected circa 1200. 

The age of the Halle MS. is not fixed by Hupfeld, and not having 
as yet had an opportunity of inspecting ity I cannot ascertain it. The 
fact, however, that both it and the Massorah finalis contain many 
incomplete lists, and that the order in which the anomalies are enume- 
rated is not according to the sequence of the books, shows that the 
materials from which they were elaborated were not only the same as 
but much older than the Paris redaction, and that the latter was made 
at the time when these Massoretic materials had already been shaped 
into proper order and form. It is therefore of the utmost importance 
that the Halle MS. should be published, for it is only by a careful 
comparison of the three Massorahs, viz., the Paris redaction, the 
Halle MS., and the Massorah finalis, that the readings of the Hebrew 
verity can properly be fixed. 

Now that two independent Massorahs have been discovered, we 
are in a better position to judge of the labour which Ibn Adonijah 
bestowed upon his compilation. Not only have the Paris and Halle 
redactions incomparably less rubrics than the printed Massorah, but 
they have neither any fixed plan nor definite order in the disposition 
and arrangement of the various rubrics. With the exception of some- 
times placing together a few lists of similar subjects, they have an 
arbitrary sequence of the different articles. Jacob b. Chajim Ibn 
Adonijah, therefore, has not only the merit of having amassed a larger 



Digits 



zed by GoOgle 



85 

quantity of Massoretic materials than is to be found in the independent 
Massorahs now discovered, but he was the first who distributed the 
Massoretic remarks under the proper places to which they belonged, 
and who arranged the whole mass of the multifarious rubrics consti- 
tuting this critico-exegetical apparatus into an alphabetical and lexical 
order, so that any anomaly or Massoretic remark may now easily be 
found by the student of the Hebrew text. 

That Ibn Adonijah's compilation, which involved so much re- 
search and labour, and which after all constitutes one portion only 
of his gigantic Rabbinic Bible, should contain many imperfections, is 
no matter of surprise to any one who understands the nature of the 
work. Indeed it could not be otherwise, when the state of the 
materials which he had to work up is considered. But though Elias 
Levita, his contemporary and co-worker in the same department, had 
already alluded to these imperfections, and rightly accounted for them 
by quoting the old adage that " every beginning is difficult, ' ,45 yet he, 
as well as Morinus, 46 Michaelis, 47 and others who repeated his stric- 
tures, found it a far more easy task categorically to refer to errors and 
omissions than to collect and correct them. Buxtorf, who alone had 
the courage to embark upon correcting Jacob b. Chajim Ibn Adonijah, 
has more generally mistaken the meaning of the Massorah than 
rectified the errors. Now that the Paris redaction has been published, 
and that another and more important independent MS. has been 
discovered, which yield ample materials for amending and completing 
this ancient critical apparatus, it will be a burning shame if those who 
love the Bible, and are anxious for a correct text of the Old Testament 
verity, do not come forward to aid in the publication of the newly 
discovered MS., and help us in procuring an edition of the Massorah 
in as complete and accessible a form as the present rich materials 
enable us to obtain. 

« Vide Supra, p. 23. 

*° Excercitatt. Biblicce, pp. 384, &c, 556, &c. 

*7 Preface to the edition of the Hebrew Bible, cap. IV., section v., p. 21, &c, Halle, 
1720. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



86 



INTRODUCTION. 



r\tiivn 



Thus saith the humble Jacob ben '] pnr p o"n p apjr taxn TOK ^ 
Chajim ben Isaac Ibn Adonijah : 1 .jn"Dp ♦"** irvam 

" He entereth in peace, where the ,im»n *h yvi kximh *man Plinth 
righteous rest upon their couches, p^ pn nt?ts /ihsxd* itsm ^ai o^pin 
who walked in uprightness." x Q , rv ntsftof? ,oniaf? p»f? w«sn 

Praised be the Creator, who ^ rm D ^ D3f ^ T3 >DniDn 
easts and yet none can see him, 1W toSSi , ram Sl? 

who is hidden and yet found by , » r 

every one that seeks him, who ^ ' n ' ' \ f1 

graciously bestowed language on >™>™ ™ nn P 1 **" ™ "^ 
mankind in order that they might ™ ' n ™P D ^ m P fif? '™J D nT ™ 
communicate precious things joined * 3 T" 1 ^" ^ ' D n ^ n fl" 3 ' f nniKD ' 
together by wisdom, so as to be- ,n'f?D ™nxa ,n^ts -jnp p* tnpn \wh 
come one, to gather his rain and nDnn q»ti ypa ts*m ,!T7Md npw 
flame, and learn his words and D*rA*m ,n^pa rrnn naanm ,rr^pa^ 
ways. He endowed his people, 

his first-born son, with the holy tongue, which is the language of 
the Law and the Prophets, and is very wonderfully adapted to open 
the eyes of the blind, and impart light unto them, so that all the 
nations of the world may know that there is nothing like this holy lan- 
guage in purity of style and charm of diction ; it is like a tree of life 
to those who possess it, and its wisdom imparts life to the owner 

1 This introductory formula is only to be found in the editio princeps of the Rab- 
binic Bible, edited by Ibn Adonijah himself (1524-25). All the subsequent editions, 
which were published long after his embracing Christianity and his death, have omitted 
it, and substituted for it the words pn$on TON, thus saith the author, thus removing 
from the very beginning of the Introduction to the Bible the name of the author, who 
had left the Jewish community. This fully confirms our opinion that his name was 
also removed from other works which he prepared for the press and annotated, and that 
his sudden disappearance from the field of literary labour is to be ascribed to the fact of 
his having renounced Judaism {vide supra, p. 13). As to the abbreviation \Ttiy$ »">«>>, 
it is the accrostic of the second verse in Isaiah lvii., VTD3 "]bn nrTCDttJD to '\TT\V Dlbtt) WQ* 
which the Jews use as a euphemic expression when speaking of the dead, in consequence 
of the traditional explanation given to this passage. Thus the Talmud not only explains 
it as referring to a beatified future life, but says that, when a pious man dies, an angel 
announces his arrival in heaven. Whereupon the Lord says that the righteous are to go 
to meet and welcome him with the salutation, " He cometh in peace, to where they rest 
upon their couches, who walked in uprightness." (Isa. lvii. 2.) Indeed we are told that 
this verse is used by three companies of angels, who go to meet the saint. The first 
angelic group salute him with the words, " He cometh in peace ! " the second with " Who 
walked in uprightness 1 " and the third with " May he rest upon his couch ! " (Compare 
Kethuboth, 104 a.) 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



87 

thereof. Now God gave it to his nn 1 ? jh nna iv** oyh nan -\vt* 
people whom he had chosen for am ,nt^ann it Sxai ,nts*an mzh 
himself — gave it to them only to mSDDi ,rrtyiBi rvpnpi f nnw ipt 
be concealed under the shadow of ^x a n^n:n iTDaan *»j**i ,rvmmt* 
His hand : for they alone know its ntr ,„ «.,-,,- „«„ ^.w. —L-- ~„ 
mysteries, its grammar, its rules, nn * nn l. /Ll. - Wtt nmmn „, H 
and its anomalies. And the men rr r L L rr 

of the Great Synagogue,* in whom "P? '"T ^ n * W1 ' D ^* w ™ 
was heavenly light, bright and ™ h P**™ ™ 3 ^ ' D ™* nn P 
powerful, like pure gold, on whose 1tW3rvi ' nninD1 ma ,"™»™ mipo 
heart every statute of the Law was P^T 1 nnD ™ ' nn P^ a$ar ^^ n ^ 
engraved, have set up marks, and 'P "*n ,niw ws^ mm? itsnpnm 
built a wall around it, and made nAi T na n^iBM X7 jpof? ,nnaTO 
ditches between the walls, and bars, wvpi ,hso 737 moD mD*»* cp naoDT 
and gates, to preserve the citadel ,mrp nnDK iidd ,irnite am »xt npp 
in its splendour and brightness ; nam ,nnn oirf?p nan ,nmna nnDK 
and they all came to the trans- j^l,, 1dd , ^, lKMrn Q % amM 
parent cloud of its burning (doctrine Dnnrw WJ M , 3 

and rising incense : and thev sane- l 

tified thlselves to take the fire ™ n ™ n ? h ™ '"*»' »™ m 
from off its altar, so that no other > mihh mrv T^ ^ *P H ^ '™ 
hand might touch it and desecrate ' D ™» Da ™^ * ' Dnnn * D P xf? ' D 
it so as to become a bat for every ""** D ^p'° pw nD n ™ > 3r ™ wn 
fool ; they strung together its gold- 
en words from columns of the Word of God — words of purity ; 
and the Spirit alighted upon them, and as if by prophecy they wrote 
down their labours in books, to which nothing is to be added. The 
princes of the people gathered together to hear their sublime words ; 
and when they had finished their work, the supernatural vision and 
its source were sealed, and the glory and splendour departed, and the 
angel of the Lord appeared no more. For no one rose after them 
who could do as they did. And now we are here this day gathering 
the gleanings which they have left ; and we capture the faint ones of 

9 The Great Synagogue or Synod (nVnan HD3> MTU** WVQft, Synagoga magna) to 
which Jacob b. Chajim refers, was instituted by Nehemiah (comp. Neh. x. 1-10; 
Midrash Ruth, cap. iii. fol. 45 b; Jerusalem Shebiiih> v. 1, 35 6), and continued till the 
death of Simon the Just (b. c. 300), who was the last member of it. It consisted of 
one hundred and twenty members, comprising the representatives of the following five 
classes of the Jewish nation : — i. The chiefs of the Priestly divisions (2M IV! TO*n) ; 
ii. The chiefs of the Levitical Families (D M lbn »tt»n) ; iii. The Heads of the Israelite 
Families (u$n »tt»n) ; iv. Deputies from the different towns ; and, v. The .distinguished 
men of all ranks (D^io). They were all divided into Elders (EF3pi» npeo-pvrepoi) and 
Scribes (D*1D1D ypanfiareii)- and among the many important enactments and institutions 
which are ascribed to them are — i. The compilation of the Hebrew canon and the 
various readings ; ii. The composition of the Book of Esther ; iii. The introduction of 
fixed formulae of prayer ; and iv. The foundation of colleges. Comp Kitto's Cyclopadia, 
8. v. Synagogue, the Great. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



88 

their rear-guard, and run in their nWi on ,Dir^ro q»33tbi ,nn^aar 
path day and night, and toil, but : dtv^n yn *6i p^3i ,Dn*^poa yvia 
can never come up to them. pjni ,^aa wn i*n? ,T»:iDn 1DK 

Thus says the writer: I was -wk ,ron&n own nw^ ipv ,<fem 
dwelling quietly in my house, and , 3 t, D t, D1 ,nonpn W'anp toa;i n*pf? avip 
flounshing in my abode, prose- ^ aD , T 3%W1 ^ n nirw a 

cuting djhgently my studies, at ^ ns ^ ' 

Turns, which is on the borders of , ' , 

ancient Carthage, when fate re- * w ™* ■* ns M1 ' nS ™ ^ n 
moved me to the West, but did' not T ? 3 maw rniT1D1 '™™ n3a * 3 l Dm T 
withdraw its hand from afflicting v™** 1TO '™ DDn '»*** ™ n W*** 
me, and afterwards brought me to ^ittoin two o?o ™*' r^iaof? wir* 
the famous city of Venice. And % W* ,rnD * ,m:n^n pbo 'Jtsi 
even here I had nothing to do, for "vpa naaiDKi ^j noipK ,maa^n 
the hand of fate was still lifted Tpn dns tinm ,r-naimai n*pi»a 
up, and exalted over me ; and its mm Hipn *a »nmpf? mm ,B>nno nttnPD 
troubles and cares found me in the orvn »*k nnxun n'Dnn nn« p*k *a£ 
city, smote me, wounded me, and %n^DU ShW to id* rAtfom 
crushed me. And after about three ' ^ mVwan ,ifcta mi vrw 
months of sufferings, I left for a ' ,_„ _ mw „-,,-,,* n ™ -» M 
little while the furnace of mv afflic- L l l 

tions, for I was in a thirsty land. " , y / " 

I said in the thoughts of my heart, % »™ ' 1D1En "* * % * w *** ™ 
I wiU arise now, and walk about 8l ^ na* rmo wn ,ima» ma <?a 
the streets of the city. As I was * .1™" ™ n» w ? ? iriD axon ns 'a 
walking in the streets, wandering ona tdpA ,o»DQ"i3n hdd maw 'nxan 
quietly, behold God sent a highly ,rmvpmiaa Dsnxro oaatni ,mpan nsppa 
distinguished and pious Christian, mjaif?o utr np ,ninr'n ^moa o^p»m 
of the name of Daniel Bomberg, : amn pnaa maroaDi ,epa tjnxa Danism 
to meet me. May his Bock and #w *nD rfcna iooa «mm» »d ^> *|K1 
Eedeemer protect him ! This was , Dn ^ W1 ^l, p:nDD pK , a ^ a , nn ^ 
effected through the exertions of an 

Israelite, who bestowed great kindness upon me, and whose name is 
R. Chajim Alton, son of the distinguished Moses Alton. May his 
Rock and Redeemer protect him ! He brought me to his printing- 
office, and shewed me through his establishment, saying to me, 
Turn in, abide with me, 8 for here thou shalt find rest for thy 
soul, and balm for thy wound, as I want thee to revise the 
books which I print, correct the mistakes, purify the style, and 
examine the works, till they are as refined silver and as purified 
gold. 

Although I saw that his desire was greater than my ability, yet I 
thought that we must not refuse a superior. Still I told him that I 

8 The expression niMfr, with me, is not the editio princepa, but there can be no doubt 
that it has dropped out by mistake. The subsequent editions have, therefore, rightly 
inserted it. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



89 

did not know as much, nor nearly ts^i r '»n ♦Via *ojrr *6 n»h n^ kmdk 

as much [as he supposed], in accord- pne spo nD^rrra jro-ina ,»wtd anp 

ance with that we find at the end aim *A*sb jnn *jm »a in ,|^un A* 

of chap. ii. of Jerusalem Maccoth : y^ fWn p 3 ^ jnp0 p 3W nm t, t, m 

"A man who knows only one book, n0l L, 3 p , an H3H ^^ Hnn in L, ^^ 

when he is in a place where he is , hM ^ , r l, 4m , msj> ^^^^ ^^„^ 

, -i /. , ^ . , -ii 'fljn i »B71 *D3H *38*t t*trDD& 8*On3 

respected for knowing two books, t. * L 

is hi duty bound to say I onty "=»* *»"" ^ Cn ^ /" "^P 

know one book."* And as I have I™ 3 P™ Q1 ^ Drn **** "*™ a 

no great intellect, how could I, ™ 3 n ' n F 103 ^ Dt6M %aTI Nn:D H:iln 

being so low and insignificant, T^tea inrn *ja ,rnni* *naroi 

undertake such great things, from w -renn mdv ,dw rente -jroittew 

which, peradventure, mischief might tei 8 .ite o^ipn anno dkxd3 ma Tmn 

ensue, seeing that E. Ishmael nnaat? min pa phrb pm ,nm pta p» 

had already exhorted a Scribe in pa idd3 n&vnn mat? ,no ^pa» rmrA 

his days ( Soto, 20 a, and in other Tn n^ irnan iidk 1 ? aa« n?D* t mh m pa 

places), "My son, take great care ^ , njn ^ WMD & p D1B t, piDKn 

how thou doest fey work, for % m m hm ,«« K 3 <Tm 

work is the work of heaven, lest l 

2L j Ta ^"* vc "> ACDt »im no Time wina Kb w ,aoio ^iiaD 

thou drop or add a letter, and ' L L L 

thereby wilt be a destroyer of the ™* "* n * ^ nm > T » ""P "^ I J 
whole world," • which is still more nS * ^T" n ™ n "^ < T ™ T ™ I* 
applicable to the present time, ™ n ' n ^ wwrrro Vanm V^m 
when the distinction between the : **"iaDD 

oral and written law has ceased, 

as both are now written down, and a mistake may describe the 
right wrong, and the wrong right. Therefore, I felt that I must not 
rely upon my own judgment, but examine two or three codices, and 
follow them wherever they agree ; and if they do not agree, must 
choose from among the readings those which appear to me unobjec- 
tionable, and sift them till I am convinced that they are correct and 
clear, especially as Eamban 6 and Eashbam 7 have already counselled, 
in their Theological Decisions, not to make emendations upon mere 
conjectures. 

* The quotation from the Talmud is not literal. It is as follows: MTTT ODmttani 
•D'Drt M3M vhyia win pV toiV "ps vhm pn D3n »in 13 n^ pp»o paw T\t& 'hni rtom 
(Comp. Jerusalem Maccoth, ii. 7, p. 32 a, ed. Gr»tz. Krotoshin, 1866). It must be 
added, that the editio princeps rightly reads o*an, at the end of the quotation, and that 
the future editions have wrongly substituted for it *V3Q. 

5 Neither is this quotation literal. It is as follows in the Talmud: ym in '31 
^3 n» mno nn» nNSoa nn» ni» Tnn im nm* ma *VDnn wott a^n Dnatt? n3«bo "|ro*toD 

i*na oViyn 

6 Ramban (]"ycr>), is a contraction of the initials of pjl3 p mDD *i, B. Moses b. 
Nachman = Nachmanides. This distinguished Commentator, Talmudist, and Eabbalist 
was born at Gerona, in Catalonia, about 1195, whence he is also called by Christian 
writers Moses Qerundensh. He died at Ano (Ptolemais), about 1270. For his life and 
writings, see Kitto's Cyclopaedia, s. v. Nachmanides. 

7 Eashbam D"3ttn is a contraction of the initials of tmo p tottnti? *3n, Rabbi Samuel 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



i 



40 

And it came to pass, after I nvvh ,o»bti q» *h idik ^ W1 
had remained there for some time, -pair oppi Tpn ,a*nv roa^o tdn^b 
doing my work, the work of heaven, ,133*? y&t*o ,i»P w^P iv* i»n rm 
the Lord, blessed be his name, H: im ^ nD ^, ^a, nn»p D^nn 4 ? 
stirred up the spirit of the noble ^ alM1 Dnrp D ^ n ^xDn * fT *fci n M 
master for whom I worked, and „__ _ s ™, ™,»>-«« « M -,,„,*, -,, ,-» %M - t 
encouraged his heart to publish the ^ ^ 1 ^ % 

twenty-four sacred books. Where- ' l l « 

upon he said to me, Gird up thy £" VT» **wi Dnomo *iitet i,*np 
loins now like a man, for I want 10 "l n ? n 1™ nf?nJn nnDDn ' Dn nnai 
to publish the twenty-four sacred 

books, provided they contain the commentaries, the Targums, Mas- 
sorah^inagna and the Massorah parva, 8 the Keri and Kethiv, and 
the (ethivXgvelo Keri, 9 plene and defective, and all the glosses of the 
Scribes, with appendices containing the Massorah magna, according 
to the alphabetical order of the Aruch, 10 so that the reader may 

ben Meier, grandson of Rashi, and a very excellent commentator of the Bible. He 
was born about a.d. 1085, and died about 1155. Comp. Kitto's Cyclopcedia, 8. v. 
Rashbam. 

8 Both the Massorah magna (sfman miDO) and the Massorah parva (TOTOpn miDo) 
contain the traditional and authoritative glosses on the external form of the Hebrew 
text. The former, which is generally given in the margin above and below the text, 
as well as at the end of the Rabbinic Bibles, is more extensive, and quotes in full the 
passages which come under the same rubric ; whilst the latter, which is written in the 
margin at the side of the text, or in the margin between the columns containing the 
Hebrew text and the Chaldee paraphrase, simply indicates the number of the passages 
which come under the same rubric, or hints at other glosses in an abbreviated form, 
without giving the reference. It was for want of space in the margin of the Hebrew 
text that the Massorah magna had to be divided into two parts. The divisions thus 
obtained are respectively denominated — i. rwvto miDD, Massorah marginalis, because 
this portion of it is given above and below the text; and, ii. TvyXPQ miDO or n*fflD miDO, 
Massorah finaus, because this portion is given at the end of the Rabbinic Bibles. 

9 The various readings exhibited in the Keri (i. e., as read in the margin), and the 
Kethiv (t. e., as written in the text), are divisible into three general classes — i. The 
class denominated Keri and Kethiv and Kethiv and Keri (iwt *lp .njn 1TO), which 
comprises words differently read to what they are written, arising from the omission, 
insertion, exchanging, or transposition of a single letter. This class, by far the greater 
portion of the marginal readings, may properly be called Variations, ii. The class 
called Keri velo Kethiv (a>nD vfa np), marginal insertions of entire words not to be 
found written in the text, of which the Massorah gives ten instances, viz., Judges x. 13 ; 
Ruth iii. 5, 17 ; 2 Sam. viii. 3, xvi. 23, xviii. 20 ; 2 Kings xix. 31, 37 ; Jer. xxxi. 38, 
1. 29 ; and, iii. The class called Kethiv velo Keri (np mVi 1TO) omissions in the 
margin of entire words written in the text, of which the Massorah gives eight instances, 
viz., Ruth iii. 12; 2 Sam. xiii. 33, xv. 31 ; 2 Kings v. 18 ; Jer. xxxviii. 16, xxxix. 12, 
li. 3 ; Ezek. xlviii. 16. For a more extensive discussion on this subject, see the article 
Keri and Kethiv, in Kitto's Cyclopaedia. 

10 As the glosses which constitute the Massorah magna are too extensive to be given 
entire in the margin of the text, by far the greater portion of them have been removed 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



41 

easily find what he wants. 11 Like *prn u ,wpiaB *nxb^ na *mp yvr }*o^ 

a bear bereft of its young ones he naa yon *a ,m»pS ttw *6 ^3p ana 

hastened to this work, for he loved ,DiDin ansa owpan tnDi»A «np ,npjr 

the daughter of Jacob. He sum- f mats^D nwyh n*a wdd »^o w»^i 

moned the workmen who were ^Dm rAjnm ,?iro nam ^ wbi 

skilled in printing, and each one n ^i w on*m rapn m«-sA >n* 

with his tools in his hand at once ^ ^ H DW| ^ ^ 1Jmn 

betook himself to the work. Seems _i L ' l 

au au x au i a a nn^D nrui .nrwianoa row xb neoa 

then that the work was urgent, and y i_ 

that it would redound to the glory no * ™» ' mD •** "»" ™ 3 " ^ 3 

of Israel, inasmuch as it will shew : 1DM n *' D ' ' 3D 

the nations and princes the beauty **V ,P»w» n3 ™ ^ * ™™ 

and excellence of our holy law, — unna orn uop -wk u*Dan nirDD nain 

for since it was committed to writing in xbi miDD *b na^a pnpo nv* ,n? 

nothing has appeared like it, — and -jpd» rAjnn no *a dtdks ,moDn win 

seeing, moreover, that its excellency p^ : maioi nnam Dpoai ,mDD nr6 

was magnified in the eyes of the nunrA «b m»p<? r\v divd »»n Tnp 

publisher, becoming, as it were, ^ -^ , 31 >rri0Dn n t, pD Dnrm DnDpn 

the chief corner-stone with him, I l^, „ nm ,, -„,„., ,«.,«.,-, -., H .x ***«%> 

a r a ai. r iaiit * £• ' 31 rpP nai nBna oneon airo? n»D'K 

set my face to the fulfilling of his ' r . ^^ „,„. ._ 

desire. L L ' 

And now, smce many of the r 

people, and among them are even 

some of the different classes of our learned contemporaries, who in 
their heart value neither Massorah nor any of the methods of the 
Massorah, say, What profit can be derived from the Massorah ? and 
for this reason it has almost been forgotten and lost, therefore I be- 
stirred myself, as this afforded me the opportunity to do the work of 
the Lord, to shew the nations and the princes the value of the Mas- 
sorah ; for without it none of the sacred books, and particularly the 
Pentateuch, can be written with propriety and correctness. 

We purpose, in the first place, to reply to and refute some of the 

to the end of the Hebrew Scriptures, where all the words on which there are any 
Massoretic remarks are classified and arranged in alphabetical order. This portion 
as has been remarked in the preceding note, is called Massorah finalis. The Aruch 
C"pTO) is the celebrated Rabbinic and Aramaic Lexicon of R. Nathan B. Jechiel (born 
about 1030, died about 1106), which was finished a.d. 1101. It was first published 
sometime before 1480, in square letters, then in Pisauri 1517, then in Venice 1531, by 
Bomberg, in beautiful square letters, and several times since. The best edition, how- 
ever, is that of Landau, in five volumes, Prague, 1819-1824. Eiheridge's description of 
the time when this Lexicon was finished, as well as his remarks about the editio princeps 
{Jerusalem and Tiberius, Longmans, 1856, pp. 284, &c), are incorrect. Comp. Stein - 
Schneider, Gatalogus Libr. Hebr. in Bibliotheca Bodleiana, cols. 2040-2043. Zunz, 
Notes on Ascher's Edition of the Itinerary of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela, London, 
1841, vol. ii., p. 18; Kitto's Cydopadia, s. v. Nathan B. Jechiel. 

11 A description of this Rabbinic Bible has already been given, ride supra 
p. 6, &c. 

G 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



42 

later great sages of blessed memory, ,wmh D'anp ,nmh oanat n^nrwn 
who were nearer our time, and who »a ,p mxru aroi npn *a wn i»k 
maintained that the Keri and the n:ne>m ,nnDon naa rttiPtnri ro^:a 
£>^iv originated as follows: During > m ^ flTO mpon »$nr n^am ,f?icA&n 
the Babylonian captivity, when the mpD31 fDn DD3 np^nD ikxd n^n:n now 
sacred books were lost and scattered ^ ^ ialo fc a fc m pmnm 
about and those wise men who ^ Q ^ w 

were skilled m the Scriptures were , ! J jl 

dead, the men of the Great Syna- m f ^ ** '««» n » 3 D ^ DD "^ 
gogue found different readings in Dn ^ «"" ™ 3 * ™ 3 .*> n P nn "^ 
Sie sacred books; and in every :majnD 

place where they met with a doubt- )^ *™J pa to tnsnn f?j> -rpa Ml 
ral and perplexing case they wrote irtaaai /nan noaa miDDn ^pa pai 
down a word in the text, but did :mtwi no pmown ,jrmnppm »npa 
not put the vowels to it, or wrote ,pnp u^p onann D*rnn hy a^w DJ1 
it in the margin and left it out in ^^ ,rwnpn wrrona uD^m wx? *a 
the text, not being sure as to what ia nnB1D -n&y a i ,dhqid pp»n pte n'*a 
they found. Thus far their words. . D:mD :rn31 3TO1 npm 

But I am far from adopting their ^^ %mm im ^'^ Da 

opinion, as I shaU shew in he ' na ^ ^ ^^ 

sequel, and refute them from the r ' , ' — -^ 

Tidmnd ca^arm cap hdh^d -jvipn CD^pl 

I shall, secondly, notice the " 0DTf? ^ripn rena^ orat vmnin 
differences which in many places ' ntm P n " n ™ ^ ) im * hv na " T * » m 
exist between our Talmud and the ip»™ ropeo vn a^nai npn *a ow.a 
Massorites, and everywhere side • wits^i omDP nwi ,riTn:in now hpjk 
with the latter, and state what we pnpia iiddd >jrat? pnea 18V TiSKn 
have learned from them. 

I shall, thirdly, refute the heretics who dared to accuse us of 
wilfully altering and changing passages in our holy law, as in the 
case of the eighteen passages called the corrections of the Scribes, the 
removal of the Vav by the Scribes, 12 the Keri and the Kethiv, and the 
order of the construction. 

I shall, fourthly, explain the plan which I have adopted, both in the 
Massorah parva and the Massorah magna, to facilitate the reader. 

Let me then, firstly, do battle with the sages of blessed memory, 
who lived nearer our time, for they spoke unseemly against our 
holy law, saying that the Keri and the Kethiv exhibit the doubts which 
the men of the Great Synagogue entertained. And these are their 
names, and these their words. 

Ephodi, 18 in chap. vii. of his grammar, writes as follows: "Ezra 

M An explanation of the phrases, ' emendations of the Scribes ,' and ' the removal of 
Vav by the Scribes,' will be found below, p. 48, &c. 

18 Ephodi (TDM) is the appellation of B. Isaac b. Moses Ha-Levi, the celebrated 
grammarian and polemical writer, who flourished a.d. 1 360-1412. It is a contraction 
of pr? 1D»DV© >3N» TON, thus says, or 7, Prophiat Duran ; and though it is the same 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



43 

the priest, who was the most ac- onoion vm uhvn : nwh nn aro 

complished and the chief of the »*dkd fe ori iwn ipj iDion |rwn *n?p 

Scribes, bestirred himself, and ex- ohdidh hs irp pi f nnpan jprA irw 

erted all his powers to rectify what n^ana onn onsDn iapm f inmt D'Kan 

was wrong ; and in like manner mw ^ n aB n? nw ip ,-wd'W no 

acted all the Scribes who Mowed m:pnm n , piDDrn n w»n w»a diA* 

him They corrected all the sacred amD wam ^ nonm ^^ nrniwil 

books as much as possible in ^ ^ ^ 

consequence of which they have ¥ ' r ' 

been Reserved to us perfect in the ™P D: » ' n ™ n nDD Dni Dnian mD 

numbers of chapters, the verses, T" "* ^ 3ni '« nn D ™ n ™ 

the words, letters, plene, defective, )«=> IP >***» ™» P D1D * wnh >*™ 

the abnormal and normal phrases : uw? 

and the like, and for this reason no hy *3nDn 14 nana^> unai TIDpm 

are denominated Scribes. To this owaaf? inonpna nib mod na*w ,pnp 

effect they have also composed niten *a nsnn : \y\wb nn o<3ivt*n 

treatises, which are the books of the n a« rmwnn m^a» 'B*? ,p wmm n^tn 

Massorah, and made the Keri and 1jnr ownm >ieAe iWen oneon 

Itafcw; in every passage in which n , Tnw n t, njn ^ %WK1 inD KnpDn 

they met with some obliterations % „u, % ™* m „„,u~ %kM .~ „, m ,L ._,«, 

and confusion, not being sure what _ ^ ^ w .„ lJ„™ ^l ^ s ^ m «,„ 
,, -j- »i mi. lana/iwan 7» onjn w ann ins ona 

the precise reading was. Thus , ' , , 

far are his wordT^ ^ ^ naD 13n3 1X ' inn P 3 ^ m 

But what surprises me still more is, that so holy a man as Kimchi 1 * 
should also utter similar things in his introduction to the earlier 
Prophets. The following is his language : " It appears that these mar- 
ginal and textual readings originated because the sacred books were 
lost and scattered about during the Babylonian captivity, and the sages 
who were skilled in the Scriptures were dead. Whereupon the men of 
the Great Synagogue, who restored the law to its former state, found 
different readings in the books, and adopted those which the majority of 
copies had, because they, according to their opinion, exhibited the true 
readings. In some places they wrote down one word in the text 
but did not punctuate it, or noted it in the margin but omitted it from 

which he especially assumed after 1391, to conceal his real person from the Christians, 
who at this period of his life compelled him to abjure Judaism, he is also known by the 
name Prophiat Duran. His grammar, entitled the Grammar of Ephod (lBM tTOJO), 
to which Jacob Ibn Adonijah refers, has only recently been published for the first time 
(Vienna, 1865), and the passage in question is to be found in p. 40. 

!* The Kimchi here referred to is David Kimchi, also called Bedalc, p"*n= , TTOp Tn'l 
(born a.d. 1160, died about 1235), who wrote commentaries on nearly the whole of the 
Old Testament, and who is the author of the famous Hebrew Grammar called btan, and 
the Lexicon entitled DtmDTT. He may be regarded as the teacher of Hebrew of both 
Jews and Christians throughout Europe. Comp. Kitto's Cyclopaedia, 8. v. Kimchi, 
where an account is given of his contributions to Hebrew lexicography and Biblical 
exegesis. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



44 



the text, whilst in other places they yima im -pia uro pi ,D'3d:jb lana 
inserted one reading in the margin 18 : )*o np d^dsd im -jTini 

and another in the text." 16 Thus pn* i:>t ^wn-Dts pnr p "fc?ni 

far is his language. rvDT idd^ inonpna orrfy wn 16 nmaf? 

Don Isaac Abravanel, 16 the me- ia 1D , 3Dn ^ mn njnni f „ 1B ,L, nn 

mory of the righteous be blessed, l,^ , 3 n L, Nn Q , Mnn 

refutes them in his introduction to l l l 

Jeremiah in this manner, and these L ' ' 

are his words: --The opinion WM nDD1 ™'* n T^ ^^ 

wherein all these wise men agree, and rmmio iAm >utai wn D<praD 

their conclusions, are far from being P 1 * ' a '? 1DD *° n ^ nw 13DD 1Dm 

mine. For how can I believe with " Dn ' n P n * M » , n ™ a *«» a ™" n P a 
my heart, and speak with my lips, : 'bw nvmNHD nasi jum mirn 

that Ezra the scribe found the book bxvt< nip mn ,wwb nn tdk *TO 

of the law of God, and the books of npn rrn ok ,rroi jn maon *m dtikd 

his holy Prophets, in an unsettled f n*D^inDri onDDn wxdp no *m stdi 

state, through obhterations and con- DnD ^ nT1 nrM nD1Dn H ^ hq^dn 161 

fusions ? Is not the scroll of the ?inaD lm munoan w dpi ,™ jw 

law in which one letter is omitted MM ^.« -^l _ r%1 > _ _ w «,,«.,%* -,m« 
•n i « xt i i «j *iTM no? ns'K p dn .o^eno tiki 

illegal ? How much more must it , , / ' -«.„„.,„ 

, ° ,, , .7 r . -, ., 7& SS71 Hpn 7tt TDD 11DD3 D'3lD3n 

be so through the Ken and the l l 

Kethiv, which are found in the law, 'P B1C ? Aw ™ n nvna ■"* ^ ' a ™ n 
since, according to the Keri, many D * ^ ^P n D * MD * T * n ""P™ ™* 
letters are wanting in the law," etc.? =«»* " n%n WP ™ dni ,a*ian 

Again he says, and these are his nnawm nann a»n »a r o»»aD npn nriDU 
words, "Behold, I ask these men if, **?» )vs yimr> onr a 'nam ,nvp:n ny 
according to their prevailing opinion, : tfijn na noon 

£A# iTm and ^ Kethiv originated 713731 iDsn n? md nirn ok )VJB> 
because they [Ezra and his asso- «3^ *i*n rvn ,ni7in ixd onDDa 7DW 
ciates] found various readings, and 

Ezra, not being sure which was the right one, put down both readings, 
one in the margin and the other in the text ; if it be so, why should 
we, in explaining the Scriptures, always follow the Keri, and not the 
Kethiv ? And why should Ezra, who was himself doubtful, always 
have put the points in accordance with the Keri, and not with the 
Kethiv ? And if he meant [to give preference to the Keri] he ought 
to have inserted the Keri in the text, as it is the true one and 
agrees with the points, and put the Kethiv in the margin because 
he did not approve of it. 

" Moreover, if the obliterations and confusion to which the books 
were subject in consequence of the captivity gave rise to it [i.e., the 



16 The quotation from Eimchi is from the Introduction to his Commentary on 
Joshua. 

16 Abravanel, or Abarbanel, the famous statesman, philosopher, theologian, and com- 
mentator of Spain, was born in Lisbon in 1437, and died at Venice in 1508. For a list 
of his works on Biblical literature, see Kitto's Cyclopedia, 8. v. Abravanel. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



45 

Keri and the Kethiv] y it ought to i« tfovorow Dipan »ed ,mpn -jti by 
occur accidentally in the passage dniWi min nDoa **on nrun^sDj 
which happened to be obliterated, npm ,U"2V -|Sd ainaw 17 -|^ -^ nwz 
or in which [a doubtful reading] Dun .nm d?b am pi ,Dntt¥ -jfo mn 
was found. Whereas thou wilt D w 3V ntea tefem tfiorai mpoa to» 
find in the law of God, in tha n ^ a w nny: 1M ^ an 

section L<?cA L'0/?a [Gen. xiv. 2J, 17 „r „_ ___ MnmtM . m ' -,„.»„ 
that ArfAtj; is D"3¥, and £/«? Zen ' L^,.- , Q --„,- l 
is D'fiOV ; and the same thiner , ' ' t 

occurs a second time [ibid, verse • . ' ••w-^ »u imw 

8J. Now, could this accidental nVl '™ n D%D3nn wrn nB "° n:nn 
obliteration always occur in this : in '" 1D in ' 

word D"3¥ ? The same is the *"iw o I*?** pjpn nrcts o pW 
case with all, e. g. myj, which is onin^a minn nsD ikxd injrDi isiDn 
written twenty-two times "IJJJ, 18 and nipan m»p^ Tnpnnp mipi ,nrnDni 
occurs only once as plene, in Deut. nna-mi ,*npD3 p»p n»piDD »didi D<&9&m 
xxii. 19 ; so also D*Wa, which is mi1D1 ppfa p30 , DD fDnT r fe liru WK 
always £A# Im, and the Kethiv is 

Dmno, and the Keri n^ae*, whilst the Kethiv is always ni23B». 19 It is 
evident, therefore, that the thing is not as these sages thought, and 
may the Lord forgive them ! " 

Abravanel, therefore, submits that the true account of the matter is as 
follows : — " Ezra the Scribe and his associates found the books of the 
law entire and perfect, but before betaking themselves to make the vowel 
points, the accents and the division of verses, they examined the 
text, when they found words which, according to the genius of the 
language and the design of the narrative, appeared to them irregular. 

17 This is the name of one of the Sabbatic lessons, comprising Gen. xii. 1 ; xvii. 27. 
According to an ancient custom, the Jews to the present day divide the Pentateuch 
into fifty-four sections, to provide a lesson for each Sabbath of those years which, 
according to the Jewish chronology, have fifty-four Sabbaths, and thus read through 
the whole Book of the Law (mn) in the course of every year. Each of these Sabbath 
sections, or sidras (mvpd), as it is called by the Jews, has a special name, which it 
derives from the first or second word with which it commences ; and Jewish writers, 
when they quote a passage from the Pentateuch, instead of saying it occurs in such 
and such a chapter and verse, give, as in the instance before us, the name of the 
Sabbatic lesson, because this practice obtained prior to the division of the Bible into 
chapters and verses. A full description of these Sabbatic lessons, as well as of the 
manners and customs connected therewith, is given in Kitto's Cyclop., art. Haphtaba. 

18 In the present text we have only twenty-one times T3W for mw, viz., Gen. xxiv. 14, 
16, 28, 55, 57 ; xxxiv. 3 (twice), 12; Deut. xxii. 15 (twice), 16, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26 
(twice), 27, 28, 29. 

19 The marginal reading D^IFTO for the textual tfbBPl occurs six times (Deut. xxviii. 
27 ; 1 Sam. v. 6, 9, 12 ; vi. 4, 5), and n333W* for 7\by& four times (Deut. xxviii. 30; 
Isa. xiii. 16 ; Jer. iii. 2 ; Zech. xiv. 2). The former instances are given in the Massorah 
marginalis on 1 Sam. v. 6, and Ochla Ve- Ochla, section 170; and the latter in the 
Massorah marginalis on Isaiah xiii. 16, and the Ochla Ve-Ochla, section 169. Comp. 
also Megilla 25 b ; Sopherim viii. 8 ; and infra, p. 50., &c. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



46 



niaTi 



H33D^ npa ens'? -pmn 
mpn nooa rr.t? xntp a*nw 



Hence he concludes that this must *n»D in*6 n? nTw iDxpa apn ,"iiDon 
have originated from one of two onn omn onana anian }ra» dk ,niao 
causes : (1) Either the writer, ac- nbyn «oa minn nnDD nmon jd iid 
cording to the degree of inspiration pinD ^ nw i, n> n ^ D ^ ^ irmn3 
vouchsafed unto him, conveys by injna „ an %3 ;Q , n ^ n -iddd nai 
these anomalous expressions some of niaon n3D ^ lanM rwr ^^ 
the mysteries of the law, and there- « ^ ' i3nD3 

fore he [Ezra] did not venture to , 

expunge anything from the sacred ' ,M » 1D3 MMD 3n53 Drnn ^ 
books. Having thus perceived that awon * 1TD ww npn pnao o» ddnr 
it was written by the highest 'P? n niDVB1 P»' n P 3Q ,DD Kinn " im 
wisdom, and that there is one ,nnina» aw npn ^ ** Dn P Dn nTD1 
reason or another why the words DvlBJDI mina aina# jotp axD»a naai 
are sometimes defective or plene, ovnajn on nD up r *Ai ,nau \wh Kirw 
and why the phrases are anoma- pi .D'HWO one? npa ens^ -pxin ,nnn 
lous, he left them in the text as ,naten <?p tow tor d»* *d£ r TO»* 
they were written, and put the Keii 
in the margin, which simply explains 

the said anomaly in accordance ,. „* m l ^«« « ,.«..,, w l*, m L n , 
with the idiom of the language and ' , ' L 

the design of the narrative ;lnd of P n P nD ** a om * ™« n ™* m ™ Dn 
this nature are aU the Keris and ™ ,na'nan pnpn njrT iispa D*n*aa 

Zdfcw* in the Pentateuch. In like **™ n ' 3D ™ ™* vn ""^ * ,MnD nt 
manner, when Ezra found the word ^ * ,nn n^on nno^ mo^ jijnn pto 
D^IBiD, which denotes heights, and *a ,ymaD o» ipk npn pap ami /neon 
which conveys no meaning to us, nana it rnto*^ empri ision xt 
he put in the margin the word 
DHITO emerods ; and this is also 
the case with the word nAjB*, the 
root of which (^fc?) is used with 
regard to a queen; he therefore 
put in the margin PM30*. (2) Or 
Ezra may have been of opinion that 
these anomalous letters and words 
are owing to the carelessness of the sacred speaker or writer ; and 
this carelessness on the part of the prophet was like an error which 
proceeded from a prince. Ezra had therefore to explain such words 
in harmony with their connection, and this is the origin of the Keri, 
which is found in the margin, as this holy Scribe feared to touch the 
words which were spoken or written by the Holy Ghost. These remarks 
he made on his own account, in order that he might explain such 
letters and words, and on that account he put them in the margin, 
to indicate that this gloss was his own. And there can be no doubt 
that they [i. e., Ezra and his associates] received the text in such a 
state from the prophets and the sages who had preceded them. 
Hence, if you examine the numerous Keris and Kethivs which occur 
in Jeremiah, and look into their connection, you will find that all of 



nt nppi ,ona*nai enpn rma onaion 
ntoam na*nn khd^ tzdi^ »nn ,ioxpa 
»TDr pits inrn*? yinao men ,N'nn 
nwajriD *6ap -pp poo ]*N1 ,imvv *on 



npn an mm ,inmipv 
oa ppnco jtdt iDoa 



inn 'earn 
i^a» a«nam 



Digits 



zed by G00gle 



n»Dps yzinb anp nro'ro mosi miaan 
*Ak a^roi npo na ikxdj *6 irvDT "iqd 



47 

them are of this nature, viz., Danat* ,prjn mo on* D^a k*dti m^jpai 

that Jeremiah wrote them through -jnum ,*^ai njj»ai mpoa p iitdt 

mistakes and carelessness, etc. -,tonn nan nj? r nw nDDf? d» inonpna 

Abravanel has a great deal more p p ^ f3W K ^ npm f3W1 npnr 

upon this subject in his introduction Hnt , mv n ^ aTOn wa Dn 

to Jeremiah : " Hitherto i he says ^ WR „ ' „l ^^ „ ' % ^ „ * ^ 
- , , , , . L .. . J opd »D3 pjp on? vt<v mama m?D 

further on] we have shewn that the L LL ' ' , , 

Keri and rt* J&tto, and the Keri ** ^ ™ p3 ** ""*■* P* 1 ' Dn:nn 
velo Kethiv, are simply explanations. Dnn * M " w * oniww jnn nmi ,mp 
This is also the nature of the Kethiv rrn n ^ a "» w I 1 ™ h » in nTD "^^ 
wfo Keri. When Ezra saw that ^ P^ ,na*nan pip njrra ut jwtoi 
words were put down in the text n»a\a , nainpDinKiD % aiD»rwviBD3 
which had no meaning according npn iDaa ia lan tot ianae> fwno» 
to the simple sense of the words, ip ,i^ai vbv) G*vbvn r»D ioaa a*ro> 
he did not punctuate them, and »bd nf?ia nnrnf? &nbm mina ^ats 
therefore they are not to be read. 
From this you learn that the books, 
in which there are many such in- 
stances, shew that the speaker or 
writer was deficient in the syntax, or in his knowledge of orthography. 
Hence you find in Jeremiah alone eighty-one Keris and Kethivs, and 
in the books of Samuel, which Jeremiah wrote, the number of Keris 
and Kethivs rises to one hundred and thirty-three ; . . . whilst in 
the Pentateuch, which proceeded from the mouth of the Lord, though 
it is four times as large as the book of Jeremiah, there are comparatively 
few, only sixty-five Keris and Kethivs"™ Thus far his words. 

20 There is a great difference of opinion about the number of these various readings, 
and the passages in which they occur. As it is impossible to discuss this question in a 
note of this nature, we subjoin the following table, which is the result of a careful 
perusal and collation of the Massorah, as printed in the Rabbinic Bible of Jacob b. 
Chajim, and which exhibits the numbers of the Keris and Kethivs in each book, 
according to the order of the Hebrew Bible :— 

Genesis 25 

Exodus 17 

Leviticus 6 

Numbers 11 

Deuteronomy 23 

Joshua 38 

Judges 22 

1 Samuel 73 

2 Samuel 99 

1 Kings 49 

2 Kings 80 

Isaiah 55 

Jeremiah 148 

For a further discussion on this subject, we must refer to Kitto's Oyclopcedia, 8. v. 
Keri and Kethiv. 



Ezekiel 


143 

6 

1 




70 




Job 


54 


Joel 


Song of Songs . . 
Buth 


.... 5 




3 

1 

4 

4 

2 

1 

1 

7 


... 13 


Obadiah 

Micah 


Lamentations. . . . 
Ecclesiastes .... 
Esther 


.... 28 

... 11 

. . . . 14 


Habakknk 

Zephaniah 

Haggai 

Zechariah 


Daniel 

Ezra 


...129 
. . . 33 


Nehemiah 

1 Chronicles .... 

2 Chronicles .... 

Total 


... 28 
... 41 


Malachi 


1 


... 39 


Psalms ....... 74. 









...1359 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



48 

He, in like manner, counts how ^>aa iaa aTiai Hprno naa miai -j^in pi 

many Keris and Kethivs occur in *pa nnr rrn owaana »d nmrA ,idd 

every book of the Bible, in order to npfco ,'JD npm rmaifrm ,]i*f?n pnpna 

shew which of the prophets was . v ^ yv ^ -^aa 

more conversant with the grammar. TOpn t, p wpn ^ iwrp D3DN 

But all his views on this subject „,.„, „, _™.„, «.-,**s *^r»^^% 

are far from my notions, as I shall i to L 

presently shew, m refuting him. , ' ' y , 

The strictures, however, which D L ^ niE f m ™P n L ">/" D '* nnn '* 

he made upon Kimchi and Ephodi ^ n KniD ' n ** %a P n ^ I 3 * 1 ' niaDD Dn 

are good and apposite; and, in innM d'wkt^i^ vD,i^iAapn»« 

refuting his arguments, those of his : ^^ oman not* om ,dtik •:» 

opponents will be criticised at the ^fcuaiatsn i»n noi*t? naa "ID1K1 

same time, since both his deci- ikxb injrDi iDion m?i>» ,nana^ «nar 

sions and the opinions of Kimchi ,ianajB> ioa onicm orna^eo minn nsD 

and Ephodi are mere conjectures, : -m a^«i naa 

whereas we rely solely upon the D « i]W x in y 1Tn:a im # m ^ d^dki 

Talmud which we acknowledge; Dnm Dnal3 nrD3U , 1M anw| w 

for the heart of its sages was as ^ pnm „., W%M% . „ m „„™ ^ »l % ^' ^ 

large as the door of the temple ; r ' 

they are truth, and their words are ' * ' ' , 1 , * n f 

t^h naoaa jjotji anna am n ,ina"n wv? 

Nowl submit that Don Abravanel, ia *F K =" nDK '™*i P ?* F» omi 
of blessed memory, is perfectly right a ' n:n *o ^ ^^ *"» ^« "** 
in saying that Ezra the Scribe and ow «™&& °^k rnin nsoa i*npn 
his associates found the books of mm iDDa iwpn ,ts-ipaa wan Sat* 
the law entire and perfect, just as man ,ninn n? tn?Da ,topa m n*nb*t 
they were originally written. n? Nnpaa urn ,n'pioDn Ajs bzv 

But what he says in his first f r-nioan i^* nb hd^i ,o*apa pDD 
hypothesis, beginning with the n ^ nnoio snpa pnv a-i ibk 
words, "Either the writer, according 

to the degree of inspiration vouchsafed unto him, conveyed by these 
anomalous expressions some of the mysteries of the law," etc., till "he 
put the Keri in the margin, which simply explains the said anomaly in 
accordance with the idiom of the language ; " 21 all this is not correct, 
for in the Talmud we learn most distinctly, " R. Ika b. Abaja said in 
the name of R. Hannael, who repeated it in the name of Rab, What 
is meant by " and they read in the book, in the law of God, distinctly, 
and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading " 
[Neh. viii. 8] ? [Reply.] The words "they read in the book, in the 
Law of God," mean the Hebrew text ; the expression " distinctly " 
denotes the Targum, "and gave the sense" means the division of the 
verses, whilst "caused them to understand the reading" signifies, 
according to some the dividing accents, and according to others 
the Massorah. R. Isaac said the pronunciation of certain words ac- 
cording to the Scribes, the removal of Vav by the Scribes, the Keri 

21 Vide supra, p. 45, &c. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



49 

• 

velo Kethiv, and the Kethiv velo ynp Wrt pTsn ,p*ro *hi pnpi d-tod 

Keri, are laws of Moses from Mount ,y-iNt onoio mpn ; ^dd nwn^ ro^n 

Sinai. The pronunciation of the ,niawi irw onaio mop ^onxn f o*o» 

Scribes shews how to read pK, -ma on» imp ,tpan nriNt ,-^n nnx 

earth,iyi}&,hMvm 9 iynm, Egypt* ^ p^as.f^ nnrD -jnfnx ,n«uu 

the removal of F<™ by the Scribes ^ nyN:n ^ pnstai ms jaw 

is to be found four times in the „l „„,«,,., _ %M . '—.-I™ -«-- m ^ 
.„,, A , rrK ... rn ,nman n»Na ,n»n7Nn nana &>** 

case ol ink, afterwards (xen. xvin. i #_ t_ 

5 ; xxiv. 55 : Numb. xxxi. 2 ; Ps. ' , ' L , 

lxviii. 26], and once by ?0#p, ;] ™ ^ H! '*" '° nipB ? ** 
thy judgements [Ps. xxxvi. 7];"'^ ' nwDrn n * ' n ^ Dn " 3 r»P ■*' ?**i 
JEsri wfo jfoffcii; is seen in ma; w &* ,a» n^an »&n ,Tinm iht 
Euphrates [2 Sam. viii. 3] ; £> ; K, P«* ]«o t* T n P K 1 " P to )^ n ^ 
a man [I6td. xvi. 23]; D^3, J/**?*/ rimem nam n^m«jmn» ;moan 
arc coming [Jer. xxxi. 38] ; rfr, fo ute onaoa ksdj iAi ,K*n *6i pnnai 
for [Zfod. 1. 29] ; HK, accusative mooai ,rr^ *:» t^ moon naoa d:i 
[Ruth ii. 11] ; */K, unto m« [Z6t-rf. iA irro 'anna in^p *ddi »:n f?a a»vn 
iii. 5, 17] ; these words are read awr ,vmm n« atot mxorn nN aw 
without being written in the text, na vh ne>p ivx " ti f irppix *33 iiraTa 
The Kethiv velo Keri is seen in 

K3, wou? [2 Kings v. 18], T\X 9 sign of the accusative; T"H?> fo shall bend 
[Jerem. Ii. 3] ; *ton,five [Ezek. xlviii. 16]; D«, t/ [Ruth iii. 12] ; these 
words are in the text, but are not read [Nedarim, 37 b]" Thus far 
the Talmud. The expression nx connected with n}V??, the command- 
ment, some say occurs in Deut. v. 31, but it is not true, since it is 
not found in our copies ; nor is it mentioned in the works of the 
Massorah. The Massorah, indeed, does enumerate all the above- 
mentioned examples [as given in the Talmud], and even many others, 
but does not give HK connected with HJV©n, the commandment; it 
only gives T\H as connected with ^B|n, the soul, which is found in 

22 That is to say, since there were no vowel points to indicate when it was pro- 
nounced yn» and when y\& (in pause), or to shew that DMpti and D^2Q have simply 
dual forms without being duals, the Sopherim pointed out how these and many other 
words are to be read. 

£8 There is a difference of opinion as to what is meant by D*1D1D THD9 and the 
examples here adduced to illustrate it. According to Eashi on this passage, it denotes 
the idiomatic construction fixed by the Sopherim, which necessitates the writing of 
YYOtfn TTW and not "WTN TYQWi, and is called Tiictf because it is an improvement of or 
ornament to the style. Acording to others, this ornament of style (onDTD "YUM?) consists 
in using the word nilM at all, since it is superfluous in all these instances given 
in the Talmud, as we could very well say, rpMTO D^D* ronro "ODD. 0*3X13 Dntt? lOTp 
TVOWn D3lb ITSD, whilst, according to the Aruch, as given below, it is the removal of a 
superfluous i which has crept into the text in all these instances through a vitiated 
provincial pronunciation. The latter is the general opinion of critics as to the meaning 
of 0HD1D TITD3?. Compare Geiger, Urschrift, p. 251, &c. The instances of the Itur 
Sopherim^ quoted from the Talmud {Nedarim 37 b) are also given in the OcJUah Ve~ 
Ochlah, section ccxvii. pp. 46, 128; and in the Massorah marginalis on Psalm 
xxxvi. 7, which, however, only gives four passages, omitting Gen. xxiv. 55. 
H 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



50 

Jeremiah in connection with the ptd ^ronaf? una? »"tni ^natn pwn 
history of Zedekiah [xxxviii. 16] . 84 -nojn :|t*o ip rrorra a*na rnxom rut 
And Rashi, 25 of blessed memory, iD'ronnaivna pph yy nneio 

also says that njV»n HK occurs in ^ DD WD i> n3 t, n in ^ 13n | Wp3 Nn 
Jeremiah As for the removal of Kingf npn ?irnD nD1Dn xnTp Dy ^ 
P av by the Scribes see below, in Dn wa n| ^^ M ainsn ^ TD 
my reply to the heretics. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 

Irom this, then, it is evident L L ' ill 

that the whole of it is a law of : ^ wvu "' 3 '™» ""* "=*" nfe 
Moses from Mount Sinai, and that ^ nn "»"* nD % ^ a n *P inl 
Ezra the Scribe did not put the o^pai m« ="«* mty nx&iso naai 
jfiTm in the margin to explain o'him D n no wjrr 1A1 nam pe>f? mn» 
ungrammatical phrases ; nothing pi ,onino onw npa khd^ "pann ,orm 
appeared anomalous to Ezra, nor ,rohon f?p now hw dvp <sh rnhw 
did he meet with any uncertainties jxa iy ,maatr npa aneS -pxin 
and confusions, for the whole of it ** . 131 ^ 

is the law of Moses from Mount 
Sinai, as stated above. 

Moreover, I object to Abravanel's assertion, that Ezra, finding the 
word Dvtej?3, which denotes heights, and which conveys no meaning to 
us, he had to put in the margin the word DHinp, emerods ; and that this 
is also the case with the word ■WJ¥*? > the root of which (bw) is used 
with regard to a queen, he therefore put in the margin n|33^."26 

24 We have already remarked that the Massorah gives ten instances of Keri veto 
Kethiv, or marginal insertions of entire words not to be found in the text; and eight 
instances of Kethiv veto Keri, or omissions in the margin of entire words written in 
the text (vide supra, p. 40). The list of the marginal insertions is as follows : — 

»:i, sons of Judges xx. 13 , mM13, Sabaoth . . Isaiah xxxvii. 32 

rHD, Euphrates ... 2 Sam. viii. 3 ; D*M1, they are coming . Jerem. xxxi. 38 

«W, man 2 Sam. xvi. 21 I rft, to her Jerem. 1. 29 

p, thus 2 Sam. xviii. 20 | ^M, tome Ruth iii. 5 

V31, his sons .... 2 Kings xix. 37 i ^M.fome Ruth iii. 17 

This list is to he found in the Massorah marginalis on Dent. i. 1 ; and on Ruth iii. 17 ; 
Sopherim vi. 8; Ochla Ve- Ochla, section xcvii. The list of the marginal omissions is 
as follows: — 



DM, if 2 Sam. xiii. 33 

DM, if 2 Sam. xv. 21 

M3, now 2 Kings v. 18 



DM, if Jerem. xxxix. 12 

*pT, he shall tread . . . Jerem. li. 3 
WOTl,fve Ezek. iii. 12 



n», accusative sign . Jerem. xxxviii. 16 I DM, if Ruth iii. 12 

This list is given in the Massorah marginalis on Ruth iii. 12 ; Sopherim vi. 9, where, 
however, six instances only are enumerated, M3, 2 Kings v. 18, and DM, Jerem. xxxviii. 
16, being omitted; and in the Ochla Ve- Ochla, section xcviii. Comp. also Levita's 
Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, p. 109, &c, ed. Ginsburg. 

25 Rashi is that celebrated commentator of the Old Testament and the Talmud, who 
is commonly but erroneously called Jarchi. The name Bashi *"\2TI is a contraction of 
^pns* Tfctrao *n, Rabbi Solomon Isahi or Itzchaki = R. Solomon ben Isaac. He was 
born at Troyes, in Champagne, in 1040, where he also died, July 26th, 1105. 

*• Vide supra, p. 46. 



Digits 



zed by G00gle 



51 

This statement is not correct, epo ja*ona anna wn v-qi*? KJW 

since we are distinctly told in the fc> pan in ,"?mp n^aon na a-npn pno 

Talmud : " Our sages submit, All jma pip »*oa^ mina painan mmpon 

the verses wherein are written D'Siepa ,naaaen maStr paa ,na»S 

indecent expressions, decent expres- ,onmn rm ViaiA ,o'aran onnn ,omnoa 

sions are read hi their stead, *. </., s nK i^l, pn ^„ , D , D nit ^^ 

1?^ instead of >J£ [Deuteronomy ^ rwnnD ^ ^ w m ^ m ^ 

xxvui. oO ; Isa. xm. lo : Jer. in. * / , a ~ 

2; Zech.'xiv. 2]; Dnhp instead ™^ n«A »rtw -^ ™ «:,» ■» 

.Urh^ . ... ft • . a m* roan* fcwrrn aw» ^ate pe6 

v fD 6-1. [ ?2 U t ST 5 J iftR n^M-l^l^ r ),^ 

instead of mffo} [2 Kings vi. 25] '; ,fem n3 » r W TO '* 3 ^ 3 ™ a pD,rD 

Dnid* instead of Dnnn [2 Kings ^«i i^npa mrii th pore maaw 

xv'ni. 27 ; Isa. xxxvL 12] ; Dn*n »» T "* ^ ,MI > a °* :U11 * ^ ^ 
instead of DHV* [2 Kings xviii. ™^^»a«A.n wnawonriD 

27; Isa. xxxvi.,12]; mKVlD? in- , ' ' , l jl. 

stead ofnbnnt* [2 1 Kings x. 27]."* ^ana^n ^n nan ^ aw 1*1 
And Rashi/'of blessed memory, P ia ™ ™' Dn * ™ 1Ka ,™>n naoa 
submits that the expression to* is ™" n nvr * D * ' n,aon * D nac * m ™ 
used for illegitimate cohabitation ^ ™P a «* '^ P n P nD ^ "?* 
like that of dogs, as it is written FT* n P' T ™P a » ' na * n l 1J ^ n 
in Nehemiah [ii. 6], where *# is « r n L T w D V** ™ Dn * ' naTDn 
used in this sense. The Aruch, ^ "f,^ 13nat ™ nD1N ,DD 
too, explains it in Uke manner un- D * * n ™ ? 33 °r nn *P D% ***» ,: > nn 
der the words jvm, whereas 3DB> °ro ^hj rrn nanaf? lanai Kin p 
denotes the cohabitation of people n^ >a '»Nn "m ,nnapn pe>(?n pnpna 
who are legally married. Hence arop ids naapa rrn ntn,n? nan pow* 
we see that it is not as Abravanel nanon ut «*aan rush ,nana^ nnat Nin 
maintains ; that pnhD did not r^oa naapn dkpi ,upn «f? «npn nna 
originate from our ignorance of the 

word Ey?^, and that /?$ is not used in connection with a queen. 
Compare Rosh Ha-Shana, 4 a. 

I am not going to reply to the words of Abravanel in his second 
hypothesis, viz., "that the anomalous expressions are owing to the 
deficiency of the writer in his knowledge of Hebrew or ortho- 
graphy," for I am amazed that such a thing should have proceeded 
from a man like him, of blessed memory. How can any one enter- 
tain such an idea in his mind, that the prophets were deficient in such 
matters ? If it really were so, then Abravanel, of blessed memory, had 
a greater knowledge of Hebrew than they ; and for the life of me I 
cannot believe this. And if they really did inadvertently commit an 
error, as he, of blessed memory, insinuates, how is it that the prophet 
or the inspired speaker did not correct it himself ? Is it possible that 

w Comp. Megilla, 25 6.; Sopherim ix. 9; OcMa Ve-Ochla, sections clxix., clxx., pp. 
38, 114 ; Massorah marginalis on 1 Sam. v. 6, Isaiah xiii. 16 ; and supra, p. 45, note 19 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



52 

eighty-one errors should occur in iSDm ,o*eyD D»:iBen mx ivdt idos 
the Book of Jeremiah, and one hun- ton rraino ids ,itot idhsp to*iow 
dred and thirty-three in the Book 1033 aram npn is im ,nanaf? unai 
of Samuel, which he, of blessed 13nDt Nin kjq* ma ,e^en o*e^n hkd 
memory, himself has counted, and ^ nOK385f K 3 3 ^ ^ n ^ rn n:n:i L, 
has shewn was written by Jeremiah? X]fn DnQai npn , „ 3 -^ DnD:i 
Can we entertain the idea that a 1 ^ % „ % „ ^ 1 ^-,„ -,,*,».,„« ««-,*% 
prophet, of whom it is said, " Before L ' ' L ' „, 

I fomed thee in the belly^ I knew D ^ Dn n ™ w [J 10 **»* ™f 3 
thee, and I ordained thee a prophet '*™ n ntn ■* ™^ «v»i i»n 1** 
unto the nations" [Jer.i. 5], should no ■*» *™ T ™ w *«" *a*n 
have fallen into such errors ? nrrn "^ ™™ ■»" ' 3 ''i* 1 T Trn 
In conclusion, it appears that ,*<TDan 1'n una t£pi n^t ,tt>P mna nn 
the Don, ol blessed memory, had una? ^D'aonn ^-nn mn ina yn *a 
not seen the Talmud on this subject ; »a ,ina nwnrA ^aiajn miDa nana 1 ? 
for, according to the Talmud, there : ^mb "jm w KTD:n n^it 

is neither light nor any glimpse of ^ Dn a»x *f? *n ,nt*pon mp> D*0 
light in what he submits. It may, 11DP1 ]%np ^1 |3nal pn;D1 ? , npD NnDJ3 
however, be that the Don, of „..,,.,- -,«.„- „~ ^Lw. ,l,~, ™™ 
blessed memory, entertained this _._ L / 

strange opmion, not because he was L * , , 

unacquainted with the Talmud, but w* ?* *^»" 1* «*" «*H*i 
because he followed in this respect < n3 ^ » n2t fe*»ww -wn r vra 
the steps of the great Eabbi, *™ 3 ^"P"* ^ n ™ h l n ^ ^P' * 1 
Maimonides, 28 of blessed memory, -**> Kiwai ,'«» rwrsh na(?n mf?ia 
in the More Nebuchim, wishing to *bbi 'an ^a a^n mooan fc03K1 
shew his ability to account for it ,ohbid naoDa ww hod »ddi iiv(?y 
without the Talmud. dh^id naeea pwn ,»td npp k^> *?aK 

If an objector should urge, " Be- nr fo »,p^ p pp D ^ > 21 ^ f , w pnQ 
hold we do not find in the Talmud 

any more Keris and Kethivs, Kethivs veto Keris, removal of Vav by the 
Scribes, etc., besides those enumerated above, whereas the Massorah 
gives those and a great many others, I am therefore compelled to tell thee, 
that in the last-mentioned cases I am obliged to account for them in 
the manner of Abravanel, of blessed memory; since I believe that those 
only which are mentioned in the Talmud are the law of Moses from 
Mount Sinai, but not the others." 

Now though it is true that the Massorah does indeed count all 
those which are mentioned in the Tract Sopher'm, and a great 
many more, yet this presents no insurmountable difficulty. For we 
learn, in the Mishna Sopherim, vi. 4, " R. Simon b. Lakish says three 

28 Rambam D"im, is a contraction of the initials of pons p 7T0JO *v R. Moses ben 
Maimon, also called Maimonides, one of the most extraordinary Jewish philosophers 
who have lived since the destruction of Jerusalem hy Titus. He was horn March 30, 
1135, in Cordova, and died December 13, 1204. His religio -philosophical work, entitled 
More Nebuchim, has recently been published by Munk, Paris, 1856-1866. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



codices [of the Pentateuch] were S&W iao ,p]N3 ica »mipa ikxD3 dhdo 
found in the court of the temple, 2 '' mp *r\b* ppn ama ikxd nnaa ,*on iddi 
one of which had the reading flyo, wpi ,onp \-i^n rrnpo ama inxd owii 
the other ^08!, and the third Vtti ama wxd -ma a » irw if?oai o*a* 
differed in the number of passages D « 3 p 21 >n » nte NcS taw ♦» 'Oiep? 
wherein «*n is read with a Jod. n ta ^'tawrja r1 ^xk tai aina iksd 
Thus in the one codex it was ^ M np ^ DW1D «p fVr 
written pyp, dwelling [Deut. xxxm. 

27], whilst the other two codices had Hj\yD ; the reading of the two 
was therefore declared valid, wh Teas that of the one was invalid. 30 In 
the second codex, again, *$*OJJT was found [in Ex. xxiv. 11], whilst the 
other two codices had *!?*?*$ : 31 the reading in which the two codices 
agreed was declared valid, and that of the one invalid." 38 Now if there 

29 Iu the court of the temple those codices of the Law were kept which were used 
for reading the lessons for the Sabbaths and festivals. 

80 This variation affects the final n, the insertion or omission of which was left to 
the taste of the individual scribes, and depended upon the different localities. This is 
evident, from the remark in the Talmud (vn vfa 7vy f yam t D^IDTV prvo vn trbttMT '1D3N 
TOOTl pTI naiKJ \HBS nrYDTt fTBpa), that the inhabitants of Jerusalem omitted it in one 
word and appended it in another, according to pleasure (Jerusalem Megilla i. 11, p. 71 6, 
ed. Graetz), as well as from the omissions and insertions of n exhibited in the Keri and 
Kethiv in the Talmud (Sopherim vii. 2) ; and in the Massorah finalis under letter n (comp. 
also Massorah magna on Exod. iv. 19 ; xix. 22). It was afterwards, when uniformity in 
orthography was found desirable, that R. Ishmael and R. Nehemiah laid it down as a 
rule, that direction to, motion towards, should be indicated by an appended n if the 
word has not the prefix b (Jebamoth 13 b). .The Samaritans, however, would net 
submit to this revision and criticism of the text, and retained the old corruptions, for 
which reason they are upbraided by R. Eliezer, who tells us (ma *0 DTVO HDID? TPD13 
inVnrvD -fob -ps hitto w to mam n cm wi rrvm ma pen prw rv!n rxwvb cab 
nrroiD maxch mw yyvh rain yinb paa ibidi »'n V? jrva V? jrro »Vi), I sad to the 
Samaritan Scribes, What is the use of your error in not adopting the rule of R. 
Nehemiah ? For it is propounded in the name of R. Nehemiah : Every word which 
ought to have a prefixed b [to inlicate its motion towords] and which has it not, is to 
have n at the end ; as, for instance, 7TV\n instead of yinb .mw instead of "V2TD7 .TOTD1D 
insteal of rvOlDfr (Jerusalem Jebamoth i. 6, p. 3 a, ed. Graetz.) 

81 There is evidently a mistake in Jacob b. ( hajim's quotation, since the variation 
recorded in the Talmud is not in the reading of >b*2?N Sn (Exod. xxiv. 11), but of im n» 
(Exod. xxiv. 5). The erudite Geiger has ro doubt that TDllMtt is the Greek £»?nrnfr, 
seeker, enquirer, as the verb <JVjt«i> is frequently used in the Apocrypha for one w } >o seeks 
God, wlio searches after wisdom ; and that this variation is not owing to an oversight, 
but is intentional, since it was not thought becoming to say that at this great revelation 
boys or youths (ZFTft) were brought as sacrifices. Hence they substituted 'BIWl, worthy 
searchers after wisdom, which is countenanced by the fact that the Mishna (Sebachim 
xiv. 4), the Gemara (ibid., 115 6), and the Chaldee paraphrases, render *>M hy first-born. 
(Geiger, Urschri/t und Uebersetzungen der Bibel. Freslau, 1857, p. 243.) 

82 Jacob b. Chajim does not finish the quotation from the Talmud giving the 
examples of the third variation found in the third codex, which is as follows : TTma 
nrw -fern u*to wpi wn "ws im* mro iwra D*3«m nt» non aire wso, in the third 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



54 

be any foundation in what Don a^ phv ^tomaan ivn min xnb writ 
Abravanel said, that the reason why noon nm pyrmh n»j^ *nTjn it rm(?D 
Ezra did not venture to omit any- ,iaro3 nosnatt injna pan »a ,D»rAan 
thing from the books of God is, na^n nn» jnr irn» dk ,npif?no jnd* af? 
that he considered them to be , nDpn ^ TDn3 mpDD rnt9 DN1 < m nvnh 
written by Divme wisdom, this ^ nDKn ^ . n)D||m n:m L, un3| 
cannot escape one of two dtema- ^ mh ^ ^ ^ ^ 

tives : either Ezra knew that they , L 

were all the law of Moses from ' , ' \ r 

Mount Sinai, or that they were ™i P^ ™ wVn mipa ««» dhbd 
doubtful readings, as Kimchi, of ***» **» P*» D ^ m ofa ™? 
blessed memory, and Ephodi main- ^ ™ p dh , T iraD npn nrp pwrA 
tained. And if you say that he w* ^ % d* »"P^ I 10 ** m" 1 *wd:i Kn P 3 
did not know whether they were wpa» a 1 ? fy nfypn ,anan p k^p nro* 
the law of Moses from Mount airon pits mjw neiDn tniy jprw npn 
Sinai, why did he not expunge wrier anan m:n ,r»3ia^ wot injn*? in 
the reading of the one copy, and 

adopt that of the majority of codices, seeing that, in the case 
of the three codices found in the court of the temple, they followed 
the majority of copies ? But you will perhaps argue that the MSS. 
were equally divided, and that he could therefore omit nothing, but 
was obliged to put the Keri in the margin. Then let such an one 
shew me how it is possible to read the Pentateuch, when [according to 
the Talmud] we must not read a single letter which is not written in 
the text. How then can it enter into one's mind that we should read the 
Keri, which, according to the opinion of Abravanel, of blessed memory, 
Ezra the Scribe put down to explain the anomalous text, and leave out 

codex, again, there were only nine passages which had vm written with a Iod [as it is 
generally written Min with a Vav], wJiereas the other two had eleven passages ; the 
readings of the two were declared valid, and those of the one invalid. These eleven 
instances, which are given in Abboth de Rabbi Nathan (cap. xxxiv.) and in the Massorah 
ma?na on Gen. xxxviii. 25, are as follows : Gen. xiv. 2, xx. 5, xxxviii. 25 ; Lev. ii. 15, 
xi. 39, xiii. 10, 21, xvi. 31, xxi. 9 ; Numb. v. 13, 14. It mast be borne in mind that in 
all other instances NVT with Vav retains its archaic and epicene character throughout 
the Pentateuch, and is used for both the masculine and the feminine. When the text of 
the Hebrew Scriptures was afterwards subjected to a critical revision, according to gram- 
matical rules laid down by the Scribes, N17T was changed into w»n throughout the 
Prophets and the Hagiographa, wherever it referred to the feminine gender ; and the 
few cases in which »in is still left, or in which the newly introduced NTT refers to the 
masculine gender, are noted by the Massorah as Keri and Kethiv. Thus the Massorah 
on Ps. lxxiii. 16, gives five instances in which the textual reading is w*n with Iod, when 
referring to the masculine gender ; whilst the emended marginal reading is mil (viz., 
1 Kings xvii. 15 ; Ps. lxxiii. 16 ; Job xxxi. 11 ; Eccles. v. 9; 1 Chron. xxix. 16), and, vice 
versa, three instances in which the textual reading has win, when referring to the 
feminine gender (viz., 1 Kings xvii. 15; Isa. xxx. 33; Job xxxi. 11), whilst the marginal 
emendation has w*n. These are also marked in the margin of the ordinary editions of 
the Hebrew Bible, as Keri and Kethiv, and Kethiv and Keri. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



55 



the textual reading, which was writ- \h rra jTna fy xh* p*r\b* paxaa sins 

ten by the finger of God ? We are rAiwJi ,»»d nvnh ro^n of?3r nnu^ 

therefore bound to believe that all -^n ,rma*? lanat a'aefirA it r£a» 

of them are a law of Moses from fDnin &a o^iopa anan p kW ^np 

Sinai. Now the same question was , 3n:jt {^ aBnn « Tm maav» mhw 
put to Rashba of blessed memory . ^ nn nDnaf? 

»ttm ^can we read D^nistead ^ ^^ 

of D^ Q p, and niW, mstead of ^ ^ j^ ^ nrw ^ ^ 
n}7|B^., which are not in the text ?" 



When Rashba, of blessed memory, 
answered as follows : — 

" As regards thy question, ' See- 
ing that in reading the law one 
must not change even a single 
letter, how can the Prelector read P 1D P n P ™ P nD ' DnD1D ^P 1 » DnD1D 
njlSfc* when the text has njS|^, or * D% * nawnna : <?'3p <»d wd 1 ? na^n 
substitute another reading in any 



)ai ,ro^w» aina lorn maa»» «nip max 
D^ar ,a»nai np na pn* na»n fea 
:npn *Da *Ai rnionn »D3 mina o^aina 
inai ,'jod n»n^ na^n it rni&n 
mpn /man j*a j*k pnD omw 3ina» 



na^n prin pr rrn «^» ^wm pTD^ 
una? ^'at?nm pnnpiD ,*3oo ne>nf? 
: ^iai *»o rwo^ naf?n it avn nsns^ 
X3^ in »jdb rwrh ns^n prm TriKDi 
and not according to the wist «'3»nn djp nam : *td "i^pa^ 
,mion j*3 pa pnsi avinD p^noa nsns^ 
np nasi nD3 mwa iaap »d ^>p pjki 
jranDna KiDJa *n^DT no n^n a»na*i 
unaT TiDpntrvsns mpBD vn om ,^p^ 



other passage for what is in the 
text, seeing that all the Kethivs 
in the law are according to the 
Massorah 
KeriV 

" The answer is, that it is the law 
of Moses from Sinai, as it is written 
in Tract Nedarim [87 b] 9 « the 
pronunciation of certain words ac 



pronunciauon 01 cer«m woraa ac- h , JQ ^ , nmh 

cording to the Scribes, the removal ' , ' L ' 

of Vav by the Scribes, the Kethiv "J? % f "* P %m P™ f ^» ~«" 
wfo J&n, and ^ Jfrri ivZ* J&towy ^ ir * 1D H1 «° P D * '^ r ■*" a '* n P 
&c, are all a law of Moses from, ™ mn F DD 1irn *™ Djn »T™ »n 
Sinai.' " Thus far his language. ,tr»w naao^jna *Swna *an to ra 
From this it is evident that the : ty> p^ima pnao nf?m nm k!?i 

interrogator did not know that it 

was a law of Moses from Sinai, since Rashba, of blessed memory, in- 
formed him that it was so ; and now, seeing that it is a law of Moses 
from Sinai, there can be no more any question about it. See, moreover, 
that even Rashba, of blessed memory, supported himself therein on the 
above quotation from Nedarim, in spite of there being a great many 
more Keris and Kethivs than those enumerated in the Talmud, as 
already stated before. If these were doubtful readings, as Kimchi, of 
blessed memory, and Ephodi maintain, why were they not enumerated 
with the three instances of doubtful readings in Sopherim [vi. 4] ? 
Seeing, then, that there are no more than three, it is evident that tie 
others were not doubtful, for if they were doubtful they [the Sopherim] 
would in these, as in the former instances, have followed the majority of 
MSS., and not have put them in the margin, as we have stated above. 



Digitized by 



Google 



56 



Theri is then no more difficulty un::! irn anaty no *td nvp* N?1 



i L /ap -pt* poo ]^i ,i3ie^ nn nnaf? 
: (?'ap imonpp inn *cam crx*a3no 
if?ap -pp -]»D3 no ,1*33 ncD r 1 ?? n*r« 
dn ,npif?no jw n(? pnn 'Bam DTrasno 
-px "|-.w i*? if?*ji /:od nro*? na'rn n'nr 
nvtoh na^n na» i^> 1^: abv dki ,nvnf? 
,'3dd npD*? naVn -|2^ 1 1 ? iSm t6 dn ,»3dd 
,m\-A -p* -jaw iTvaa mr n»n )a dnc 



in the Don's, of blessed memory, 
remark, which is as follows : " there 
is no doubt that they [i. e., Ezra 
and his associates] have received 
[i. e., the Keri] from the pro- 
phets and sages of by-gone days." 
Thus far his language. To this 
I reply ; Choose one of two posi- 
tions. If you say that they re- 
ceived it from the prophets and n03 1DH P '* D I 3 D * P^rnnD Aap 1,2* 
sages of by-gone days, then this 1T ™^ * n P n ^on nt »a imv 
cannot escape one of the two alter- ^P mi : vip~ nna canancn nana 
natives. Either it [the Keri] was a naam owajnn l^ap -jaw Kin )a dm ,ntrp 
law of Moses from Sinai, and they Qwaano 13 \m on upvi n*S nnS ,-inn 
[the prophets and sages] told him pi npn pi pma ^j? n^n ,inn »eani 
[Ezra] that it [the Ken] ought to ^nauna ,«j*dd n»*A naf?n m^ia a*nan 
be so, or they did not tell him that . nl1Dn p „ R pnsn K%nnD 1,^ 

such and such reatogs were a law ^ DN ^ naoa ^ nD1 

of Moses from Sinai. If they have ^ 
not told him that such and such L L ' , 

a reading is a law of Moses from ^ P* '™ 33 n**™ ™ nn "™ D 
Sinai, then he clearly knew already f % "P »- 2 * ^ P inD ^ n *" 1T "^ D 
that it [the marginal reading] ought ™ 5n ^ »™» 1D3 % «* in I* 1 ™ »*. 
to be so [is the correct one], since n^aipon r*o ,na-n<? una? "pain 
it was received so from the prophets, ffainn wn*sb nwaf? inanpna o^nram 
And if it be so, what then does ira ,naia^ una? ipn ^p •anoni ,d» j"jj 
Abravanel mean by saying that the n^cn naoa -p nn^p paDa nain n»3n 
sacred Scribe was afraid to touch 

any of the words which were spoken by the Holy Ghost ? Moreover, 
there is another objection [to be urged]. If it be that they have 
received it from the prophets and sages of by-gone days, why have not 
the prophets and sages themselves corrected it ? We are therefore 
bound to conclude that the Keri and the Kethiv are both a law of Moses 
from Sinai, as we have proved above from the Talmud [Nedarim 87, b.] 
As to what Abravanel said in his first hypothesis, " that the writer, 
according to the degree of inspiration vouchsafed unto him, conveyed by 
these anomalous expressions some of the mysteries of the law, and 
therefore Ezra did not venture to expunge them from the sacred 
books," this is certainly true ; as the great Ramban 88 of blessed 
memory, the chief of the later Kabbalists, has propounded it, in the 
Introduction to his Commentary on the Pentateuch (vide in loco). And 
for this very reason I am all the more astonished at Don Abravanel, 
of blessed memory, for having left the subject undecided, ascribing in 
his second hypothesis carelessness to Jeremiah, because of the anoma- 

88 For Ramban, or Nachmanides, see above, p. 39. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



57 

lous expressions in ; «^B3, his soul ipbj m«a idd ,)iwhn rmn n*m» ^p ana 

[Jerem. ii. 24], # ^ 2?m in the roni -pr ,npw pnao np» nn neap 

margin being W?i for souZ, fern., rmnn wnoo t»d naim ,jiwf?n paDD 
as is evident from the usage of the : j% 3 » tap&rn ,oia*n niDa 

language. Whereas in fact this is ^ |nnro1 ^ %3n ln ^ pHDpJ 
one of the mysteries of the law ^ ^ ^ 

connected with the Levirate law, ' r i / ' » ' _^^^ 'J , 

and the initiated know it. ™ D * n ^ n in * 3 ' mDDn %sn ? irAw 

Thus we learn from these and ***** D%Mnn ,an3 ™>° "*■"/>« 

similar arguments that the Keri velo V* P" 133 " 1 Dnnn N " 1DjnD jwnra PTPi 
Kethiv, the Kethiv velo Keri, and :^pwwnianp 

all the Massoretic statements, are a ktid^ti <rnn noaa «:na^N W»1 

law of Moses from Sinai, and not mi foods jnapNna /moon ty phin 

as the afore-mentioned sages pro- ,jv^n prmn aaro »a: o»ma nwa pie 

pound, which is evident from the npa ymi v*r.ia oaa* dtiin itipum »aj 
Talmud [Nedarim 37 ft] quoted : ri nDn a»na iwm ,D*oa 

aDOve - Kin rniDDan nD»n ,d» "neoinn 18?pni 

We do indeed find that the Tal- t, h)n ni0 W 1J%W ^ irm ^ 
mud differs in many places from the ' ^ n3DDa a 

Massorah, as we see in the Tract L r l 

2VWa [88 a], where iWim., a*<* P^ nn f a« DTapD 4p .» «w nnna 

A. that beareth [Levit. xv..'lO], is mn 3n w ' Q,Ta * D 3TOm >™ «™ 
written mm, without Vav. '-V* V >*™ DT ^ D *"* 3T7 na 

Tossafoth 8 * thereupon remarks, rwp >'n nana^ wrei ^'larA n^pJTJI 
"It is strange that the reading of 

the Massorah is plene;" and concludes that the Talmud in fact does 
sometimes differ from the Massorah, as we find in Sabbath [55 b] on the 
sons of Eli, where D^WS© [1 Sam. ii. 24] is quoted. And this is the 
remark of the Talmud: [query] "Is not the reading D^JR? ? Where- 
upon R. Hunnah b. R. Joshua said the reading is D13JJD." 

Now Rashi of blessed memory remarks on this passage, "I cannot 

84 Tossafoth mBDin denotes those additions or supplementary glosses to Rashi's 
Commentary on the Talmud which are found along with the commentary of Rashi in 
every edition of the Talmud. The disciples of Rashi, finding that the expositions of 
their master might he extended and improved, set ahout to continue his work of exposi- 
tion immediately after his death, filling up every gap, and using up every scrap which 
their immortal teacher left. Their reverence for him, however, was so great, that they 
would not put down their opinions in an independent manner, hut denominated them 
mDDin additions, and hence they derived the name Tossqfists. The first Tossafists 
consisted chiefly of Rashi's own relations, his two sons-in-law, R. Meier b. Samuel and 
R. Jehudah b. Nathan, called by way of abbreviation Biban (|"in = jjin J3 rrnrr »ai), 
his three grandsons, R. Isaac, R. Samuel, and R. Jacob Tarn, sons of R. Meier, who 
are respectively called from their initials Ribam (o"an='TMD )1 pTTT 'in), Rashbam 
(D"a*n="WD )1 knot) Ti), and M. Tarn, and lastly R. Isaac ben Asher of Speier, 
called Riba (H"in="WNp pnr *an), also a relative of Rashi's. Comp. Graetz, 
Geschichte der Juden, vol. vi., p. 170, etc., Leipzig, 1861; and vol. vii., p. 129, etc., 
Leipzig, 1863. 
I 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



58 

understand how this sage is here ^k tdw *a ,)aa na?3n oann dp \pya 

cited, for I am of opinion that the <ttw ,«nSo *nh rfo *6i am ^>nj mpa* 

whole passage is spurious, and that q;h ^b onapD a ins D^ruio onsDa 

he never said it, since the reading ^ qp puov Dipoa n^n:m rrnoDa 

of the most trustworthy Codices is n:D3 ^ p np ^fn nV j na 3inD p nn , nn 

D^S? />kn*, and since it is not w nr|| in p3B , nn , D ^ p3D Dni nT 

mentioned in the great Massorah, ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 

where all the words in which the t s i i 

Jod is in the Kethiv but not in the ^ P '' P * t_ 

Zm are numbered and rubricated. n * J»^;» J« nnn*n naia i* ,4p 

Besides, the whole question is ** ^ l^ip pw pwa » i* 

irrelevant, as the meaning of D^?J?» *"' *P " D 3W >™ n D ^" 1 1 18 '' Dn3 ? D 

is not to transgress, but to circulate vn t*f?i onaip vn can mw ,»f?p ^a« 
a r^orf ; and this is what Eli said, : »wi pa np ,Dnrw n* on»apD 

' No, my son, it is not a good report iiD^nn ,^'n m f?p niDDinn 13fD1 

which I hear the people of God ona ainacr 13W oneo ^p p^in i^>» 

circulate about you [1 Sam. ii 24] ; ' aim pvnpa n^tfiTa irxo pi ,DH»apD 

Dp3gD is the plural, and refers to vw ^ nw D , p3 ^ fc^ m 0BB , 

Hjn; DJ?, the people of Jehovah, and inifi nrw mc , Dnrp „ 0D DW DW t, B 

not to the sons of Eli, who were ml-m _,_, „i -, „«««« U-, <««»-« i*-» 
... it i a DHKfv aina iy?p oneon Taai ,v*na loa 

the transgressors themslves, and m niCD<inn l, 1K3 _ mB , 

did make others to transgress." ' * oi 

Thus far his language. P"*" m >TD ™P "^ ™ * 

Tossafoth again comments thus ^ **** ™ ™ nDb >*™* PD * D 
upon the passage ; and this is *"* an no* f rw Dn»p W» rm dbw 
its language: "Our Talmud differs ru» nn»p udd o*kt nwte iw note 
from our copies of the Bible, which o'panK wvn vn in« OHPjn iron nrw 
read D^ajJD, and we find a similar a»nan ^d ton* *6 mio^m ,»»*t nna 
difference in the Jerusalem Talmud aim iAk ,rw o*paTK ^m»» na dd# mm 
on Samson, where it has, 'And popm m» ca»paix ^n»» nt^ bd» 
he judged Israel /orty years ; ' . |K3 np #pvn n , DW , nN ^ fBfnna3 
and submits it is evident that the Knn ^^ ^ ^ ^ Mnn3ni 
Philistines feared him [t. e., Sam- 
son] twenty years after his death, 

as well as twenty years during his life- time," whereas our copies of 
the Bible read twenty years [Judges xvi. 81]. Thus far its language. 

To me it appears, however, that there is no difficulty in it ; for what 
the Talmud speaks about Samson refers to the Midrashic interpre- 
tation, viz., "Why is the verse, that he judged Israel twenty years, 
repeated twice ? K. Acha answered, From this we see that the Philistines 
feared him [t. e., Samson] twenty years after his death, just as they 
did twenty years before it, and this makes forty years." Hence 
the Talmud does not say, Why is it written in the text, " he judged 
Israel forty years?" but simply, "he judged forty years," that is, 
according to the Midrash. And now everything comes out right 
when thou lookest into it. Thus far. 

Now I wonder at Rashi, — who was versed in the Massorah and Masso- 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



69 

retic conclusions, as we have seen in ^pa njna rrh «n»aoi miDDa »pa rvn 

the above quotation from the Tract noa pnen <hy *:a 'a: hyh Nm ,moDn 

Sabbath [55 6] on the sons of Eli, nna t*om an ^p m-DriD nppn ,nona 

where he argues from the Massorah ^ mp DBf < M noiw farD1 prin , 3nn 

against R. Hunna b. Joshua, and HTacn wn nDM ?nDW Km ^ 1D1 Kin 

concludes that the said passage in ^ , M ,^ ^ ^ 

the Talmud is spunous, - that Ad an3 ^ 

he should in various other places L L L 

entertain opinions contrary to those ' nrm mh » « h « n ™ « hvf ^ ^ a ™ 

of the Massorah. Thus, for in- "^nrwinaprtoimBpiiTn wiwn 

stance, he writes in his Commentary P 3 V *™ n ^ n » D "^ DV3 ™ P 1 

on Gen. xxv. 6, " The reading **^> ' a wAw a^ moan J^nnai 

is D^D without the *, to shew pi ^Bmoiw »jn t hviyi ,n^hni 

that it was only one concubine tvh mopn miooa aim ro?D nif?a ova 
i. 0., Hagar, who was identical with • :t*^D 

Keturah, according to the opinion roinn pitbs ptdh prow* 1JYI 

of Bereshith Rabba." * He also >aTO nnm TIV3 ninm ]Xtrm wnDa 

remarks on Numbers vii. 1, that «, in rrnoDan urm ".rtn h^m in* jw 

the reading is n^D and not nft? ; ,i ril ^ n t, j,„ T p ^ a ^t, D 3 , na 

whereas the Massorah most dis- ^mDa -nw »anD n^ nao nna^ mtoi 

tinctly remarks D^S is « twice a , Nn w nN 

entirely plene, viz., m Gen. xxv. w ' l l l 

6, and in Esther ii. 9. Thus also "/"" *»! ' W n ° ^ »\™ * DD 

the Massorah parva remarks on ^«°»° «<>« ™™ "* ™ "* «™ 

nt*3, Numb. vii. 1, « Not extant, ,a ' D 'J* 03 ™ ™ ' nmD ™ nTa *» 

And again Rashi remarks, in his Commentary on the Pentateuch, the 
reading is rittp [Deut. vi. 9] in order to shew that even if a door 
has only one post, it requires a Mezuzah. 36 Now I wonder at this, 
for we find in the Massorah that it is written with a 1 between the T and 
then. Rashi, of blessed memory, however, adopts the opinion of 
Rabbi Meier in Menachoth, 34 a, where we learn, " R. Papa, hap- 
pening to call at the house of Mar Samuel, saw there a door 
which had only one post on the left side, and yet had a Mezuzah, and 
asked, According to whom is this ? According to Rabbi Meier [was the 

86 Bereshith Rabba is that part of the Midrash Rabba which treats on Bereshith, or 
on the Book of Genesis. For an account of this Midrash, we must refer to Kitto's 
Cyclopaedia, s. v. Midrash. 

86 rmiD with the Jews denotes the piece of parchment on which is written Dent. vi. 
4-9; xi. 13-21, which they regard as containing the injunctioa to inscribe on the door- 
posts the words of the law. This slip of vellum thus written upon is then enclosed in a 
cylindrical tube of lead, cane, or wood, and to the present day is nailed to the right 
door-post of every door. A detailed description of this institution is given by 
Maimonides, Jad Ha-Chezaka, Hilchoth Mezuzah, vol. i., p. 93. etc., ed. Immanuel 
Athias, Amsterdam, 1702; Joreh Deah, §§ 285-292; and in Kitto's Cyclopedia, s. v. 
Mezuzah. 



Digits 



zed by G00gle 



60 



reply.] Whereupon it was asked, tt'am ,tkd ♦ai *wd nby )vh"w\ ,tkd 

"Where is this remark of Rabbi n"no tnd ^ttitk o»xd *Ak i^ y»v rra 

Meier? [Reply.] We find that a ,pmn nope hud ,onoiD D'Dsni nmoa 

house which has a door with only j^r, fTWD varian^D »« a ^ro rmiTD 

one post, Rabbi Meier says it ought KlnBO pvfw nimD DirD ^ poir f n 1T1?D 

to have a Me?uzah but the sages , m L, n ^ n njnM ^ nDW 

say it ought not. [Query ] What ^ ^ 

is the reason of the sages ? [Reply.] L l ir l 

Because the text has rtttp in the * 1D1 ^ w ' nan ?nnH nnn * T^ 

plural [thus shewing that two posts * D * D ? irn 3 > ^ ** :D * "™ n ** 

were required]. [Query.] And what nmD *^ P 1 ' 3 * a * te ninTD 3,n ^ n *P 

is the reason of Rabbi Meier ? n« ^ "^ n*« fc*pw *m Km ,non 

[Reply.] For we learn that it is nim? p^nj-o ,aron *d f?p umi »itd ,rniDDf? 

plural, whence I see that it cannot jvih |»» istd ,nD&c& *:w jmnm pna 

be less than two ; and when rtW? rrf? jtkt wpp »3T jna»N *D3 om ,ntD 

is again mentioned in another verse, main *D3 mi*? cm*D fcnptA dk p* 

where it is^superfluous, it is Jo n ^ n ^ ^ p nD31 jiDaAn «»nna mpn 

______ ___ .„ : pa ip naom motD^ dk »» n»^ 



<'\tn by nQDinn ippn ruian pnsa 1H1 
)3 miir »3T aum an »aj naia^ wot 
uypa prvaDai »3»3 id^i tdin* K^na 



teach us that it comes within 
the exegetical rule, inclusion after 
inclusion ; and every inclusion after 
inclusion is meant for diminution ; 
hence we must have a Mezuzah when 
there is only one post to the door. 87 

Thus says Rabbi Ishmael, &c. [upon which Tossafoth remarks ] ; and 
accordingly it would appear that the reading is nirttp pl&te with two 
Vavs, and not defective with one Vav ; and this is the remark of 
Rabbi Ishmael, who says that the text is of paramount importance, 
i. e., that we must explain it according to the written text or the Kethiv, 
just as we find in Sanhedrin, 4 b, in the case of HiSDb. But the fact 
is that we cannot infer anything from this ; since we find Rabbi Akiva, 
who maintains that the marginal reading is of primary consideration, 
i. e., that we must be guided by the Keri as in the case of Hispb, yet 
he himself admits that text is of paramount importance." 

Again, in Sabbath, 103 b, Tossafoth is at variance with Rashi, 
of blessed memory, where we find that Rabbi Jehudah b. Bethira 
says: — "The Scriptures use DrV3DJ1. [Numb. xxix. 19] with regard to 
the second day of the feast of tabernacles, 3*9 9?* [ibid., verse 81] 
with regard to the sixth day, and DtpB^p? [ibid., verse 83] with regard 



& 7 To understand the discussion given in the text, it is necessary to remark that, 
according to the exegetical rules of the ancient Rabbins, the Bible never repeats a word 
twice without designing to convey thereby a special meaning. Accordingly, if a thing 
is repeated twice, and the repetition appears superfluous, it is explained as implying 
more than one statement would convey. But if the repetition cannot be explained as 
implying inclusion, it is taken to denote exclusion. This rule is called in« nan p» 
Web vb* mn, inclusion after inclusion, effecting exclusion. Comp. Kitto's Cyclop(edia t 
s. v. Midrarh, p. 170, rule iv. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



61 

to the seventh day, 88 whence we ^d'd yv o'd nn ,DDDrD3 7*3 va ,rv3D» 

obtain the final D [of the first], the ; r^iai rrnnn jd D*nn -jid^ tdt )*od 

* [from the second], and the final D ^apa oipaa Dm rona^ wis? *'p*n 

[from the third word] ; and have ^ nn 89 >QDD ^ DD %3W3 ,qdd»D3 

therein an intimation from the law nriD1:5 JWU caosroa ^ara neoinn 

about the ceremony of pouring out nf?nJn mDM wn n ^ nnKDp pnD3 

water on this festival. Whereas ^ Dnn ^^ ^^ ^^ 

Rashi, of blessed memory, reads L , , 

[Sncca, 466] DDSt?D3 in connection »^ l*« T .™T» =^ P^P£ 

with the eighth day of the festival » , ' •**». 

, ., 8 , -i Q „ -, , nana 1 ? una? «'en rorom irmna DJ1 

it. e., at the end of verse 37,] and , , , , , 

M*b» in connection with the D 7° n ^ ^ *™ hnh W P" "* 
seventh day [*. *., at the end of P^ nn ,^ -aa w wpm ioa ^piw 
verse 33] » Now Tassafoth criti- 13n »«"»" ™ W n P™ 3 D * ***! 
cises Rashi, and these are the words »*n pa nn *°nBDiof? nBoaf? nDoaf? pan 
of Tossafoth : " We read DDSB>p3 .nidjpi \\vh j«a np ^ia fat^oeM *an nan 
on the seventh day, as is evident pD^wn-p^jmBDai o<p"nn DnDoai 
from Taamith, 4 6, and from the 

Massorah magna, and not as Rashi, who reads on the eighth day." 
Thus far the remark of Tossafoth. 

Moreover, in Menachoth, 34 b, Rashi, of blessed memory, does not 
animadvert upon the Talmud, which reads differently from the correct 
Codices, as he animadverted in connection with the sons of Eli 
[vide supra, p. 20], and yet these are the words of Menachoth: " The 
sages propound, < Rabbi Ishmael said in nSttto? riStpb? nbtsb 1 ?, 
the four compartments [in the phylactery] are indicated." 40 Thus 
far the words of the Talmud. In the Correct codices, however, as 
well as in the Book of the Crowns, 41 the reading is as follows, HBlpb? 

88 These words also occur in connection with the other days of the feast, but without 
the letters in question ; and as, according to the Talmudic laws of exegesis, no super- 
fluous letter is ever used in the Bible without its having a recondite meaning (compare 
Ginsburg's Commentary on Ecclesiastes, p. 30, &c, Longman, 1861) ; these three letters 
have been combined into ona, water. This exegetical rule, which is called ^DDTDI pnta 
pmvn, letters taken from one word and joined to another, or formed into new words, will 
be found in Kitto's Cyclopaedia, 8. v. Midbash, p. 172, rule iii. 

89 The passage must have been altered since the day of the Tossafoth, and made 
conformable to the present text of the Bible, as in my copy of the Talmud there is no 
difference between Rashi and the Massoretic text. 

40 The word nDETD occurs only three times (Exod. xiii. 16 ; Dent. vi. 8, xi. 18) ; in 
two instances it has no 1 (Deut. vi. 8, xi. 18), and in the third (Exod. xiii. 16), there 
is a i after the first TO, i. e., nDTQYtD ; hence R. Ishmael regards it as a dual, and makes 
of the three words four, to obtain the four compartments in the phylacteries. As the 

• limits of a note do not permit of a detailed description of these compartments, we must 
refer to Kitto's Cyclopaedia, art. Phylacteries, for it. 

41 The Book of Crowns (>an TDD) to which Jacob b. Chajim refers, is an ancient 
treatise, containing Massoretical rules on the ornamental letters. It has only just been 

IX published, for the first time, by Burges, Paris, 1866. The passage in question is to be 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



62 

[in Deut. vi. 8 ; xi. 18] and nbttb^ -]wz> «a rvm ,nDDD^ 3»ro jnna* dk n»m 
[Exod. xiii. 16], but there is no 1 ,Vn a»ro «f? i'Tif? m'b pa f?3N ,naoicAi 
between the B and the n ; yet I dn rrni o:w ]^tp ^n nooa win «jry 
myself have seen that in the ancient <kbk p»ddd irvoi ,na©ia^ mro jndp 
Book of the Crowns, even nbtoto?, ^ n nQ0 im irwin ^l,^ niDDinn wn 
in Deut. xi. 18, is written with 1t5 , m D w ^ ^»a „ m 

a 1 after the the first D. Still ™*l ,™ „* ,.:««.™., « ' ™*., 
we may rely upon the authors of ' l l l l l 

the Tossafoth, since they saw the 1* 3% ,3 n ? n T^ * ^ n *» 
Book of Crowns, and know more DnDDai ^ ■** "™ inw mwai 
thoroughly about plene and d^ »*". °* n%m L *°" ' D3n ^ °^ n ? 
rfw than we know. Tossafoth P ? a * ,«toi«Ai ~]w *a n«m ,nDDE& 
on Menachoth [84 A] observes as pwo ,: >*n nofi ,V»i aro iA i'w? k'd 
follows i 42 " In Deut. vi. 8 and xi. pcnm ;*b*didi pjnu pnDK nin w f »in 
18, the reading is HbDb?, and in na*n nf?nro *Ak jna^M n^ *?:>« ,kitj 
Exod. xiii. 16, nbttitW, according inp(?i »aj OTnn s m pnoa ,m*n epnai 
to the correct Codices, but there is pi ,i^ap» nana on jrzn-n nsn qid 
no 1 between the Q and n," and ^ p, Da p WT1 #nw ^ ln L, m nN ^ 
asks, " How can a dual be made out 
of it ? If we could apply to it the 
exegetical rule, letters taken from 
one word and joined to another, or 
formed into new words, it would be 

all right, but we find it only applied F ,D P D Nn * ni ,iw»n rrt mn iirron 
to letters at the end and beginning 

of words, but not in the middle. Thus, for instance, in JZebachvn, 
24 6, the first D is taken over from D^D, from the blood, to "*$«?, of the 
bullock, making it *IBH£ Dl, jfo blood of the bullock [Exod. xxxix. 
12]. Thus also in Baba Bathra, 111, the 1 is taken from the end 
of ^?[?3, his inheritance, and the h from the beginning of n^?, to 
his kinsmen, and made into a separate word )h, i. e., hfctt? npnj ntf brin?^ 
1^, and ye shall give the inheritance of his wfe to him, i. e., the husband 
[Numb, xxvii. 11]. To this, Rabbi Tarn 43 replies, that the first 1 of 
nbtpittp-l [i. e., the copulative] is taken from the beginning of the 
word and put between the n and q, thus reading rriBtjtop, a s we 
find it done in Baba Meziah [54 b], on Lev. xxvii. 27, where the ) 

found on p. 9. It mast, however, be remarked that in the present recension it is 
spelled mDTDTDb, both in Exod. xiii. 16 and Deut. vi, 8. Comp. also the Sepher 
Tagin, pp. 18, 19. 

42 As Jacob ben Chajim has somewhat abbreviated this quotation from Tossafoth, 
and thereby made it difficult to t anslate, I have translated the whole of it as found in 
the Talmud. 

48 Jacob Tarn was born at Remers about 1100, and died about 1171. He was the 
grandson of the immortal Bashi, and was a very distinguished Talmudist, Tossaphist 
{vide supra, p. 57, note 34), Grammarian, and Commentator, The appellation Tarn 
(Dn) = the pious, the saint, he obtained in after life because of his great piety, and in 
allusion to Gen. xxv. 27, where his namesake, the patriarch Jacob, is denominated Trim, 



iran ms>oi ,ih n*u* n'rm onn:i j^ma 
,epo3 fropiD nsDio^n nap I'm ^on 

hy n^ man epn i'»i^ n^ nbpv 'n 



Digits 



zed by G00gle 



63 



is taken from *J9J), and he shall add, ,rfrr«on rrS mm nafi yxat** rrS 
converted into the allied letter ♦, ;r$3Ti yit«*a TV mpoa mVpnapoi 
and p at between the n and 1 of *aj ^n *k /an -ma -jnsn "ifvtd^ nrpi 

♦jrrn ,*Via rrr*en epn awr *dj mpn 
r vrr , Dn rr^ mn cpTT i'*i^ rApv *a-r 
linVi naTi jncoxa p*cpi^ t<nrm 
*h ops mwr nun: -p^n ,rmn rn % WDn 
ip ,T»anr *3n ^aa na«n cpaa k^k p*opiD 
linai ,4 rn r&*n -pi ; ms^im pr^ pta 
k^h papain kVt ann »td c» nana^ 



VC^pn, thus reading VHTB'pn, 
Bnt Tossafoth objects to this ex- 
planation, on the ground that the 
Talmud asks further on, " If this 
can be done, let us apply it also 
to the things devoted to the sanc- 
tuary, where it is likewise written 
JVfc*pn *|D*1 "Lev. nvii. 15 . ? " 

And the answer is, " Even if Vou **F*- JN«* a ^a* r naiaa ut na*i smna 
take away the 1 from *|D^, and "put **aiu ^naa -jtbtd*? *a^i ; or p? itp 
it to the end of JVC^pn, it would ^aa -jnsia ,«mp^ mrpcso *Dnn Kraa 
only be IJWnpn ^making no plural]." Kpi k^k npssn mpna i6i dipd ,*nan 
But now 'if Rabbi Tarn's principle onn |jnDma ,iA it na*n DnpnS ma*na 
of applying this exegetical rule be ^fa, ^ onron ^Tp 71 *aa ^nppo 
right] we might put the 1 in the Mn n ,L, ^^ rTn ^^ „ a ^ ^^ 
middle of the word, so as to obtain . „_ ._ ,_.l ,-,,™»*% -«vn« >»«^ 
n\y<B0 plural. it is therefore ^^^JS^ ^JS 
evident that we never put the letters *T l 

except at the end of the word, as is h > J 331 13n /™> *» r*< hoipn 
the case with all the instances which 1™ P 1 ? ™ h ™nra«n mmpon 
I have adduced." Thus for the °^ s *a >™ 22 " % mS ^ p».,narS 
words of Tossafoth. Rashi, of nw °« * ,JD ** miDDa* pmnoa 
blessed memory, too, quotes the ^inn d*d»di ,D*Tinaa np o*?i£jp a*nai 
same principle [in his Commentary, f?K " pn* nx iD % em piasi ^idtt 
on B aba Meziah, 54 b], that we only ^aa **in pi ,omnD npi a*na ,rAtyn 
add to the beginning and end of 

words, but that in the middle the letters must remain as they are 
[vide in loco]. And we cannot urge in such a case that we cut up 
the Scriptures with too sharp a knife, as it is urged in all other 
places, because it cannot be called cutting except when the words are 
displaced, as it is remarked there [i. e. 9 in Baba Bathra, 111] in 
connection with the verse " and ye shall give his inheritance," &c. 
'Numb, xxvii. 11], against Rabbi Abja, who wanted to do it ; and 
Rabbi said to him, " Thou cuttest the Scriptures with a sharp 
knife." Thus far his reply. 

It appears difficult to me, that when we are distinctly told in the 
Talmud [Megilla, 24 b.], " The sages say that all passages which 
are written in the law in indelicate expressions are rendered decent by 
the Keri 9 as, for instance, nj53B^ instead of HJ7|B^ [Dent, xxxviii. 80 ; 
Isa. xiii. 16 ; Jer. iii. 2 ; 1 Sam. v. 6, 9, 12 ; vi. 4, 5, 17] ; Dnhp 
instead of BvSy ; the Massorah should only give six instances where 

the Kethiv is D^Bg," **& the Keri D ^ nl ? P eut - xxviii - 2 ? ; 1 Sam. v. 
6, 9, 12 ; vi. 5, 6], and omit the one which occurs in 1 Sam. vi. 12 ; 



Digitized by 



Google 



64 

and, indeed, all our best Codices do no *ojrr ^i .nhv D*p*ncn anson 
the same. Now, I cannot account rrmiw ,h*vh xwnma «*?« ;vnnh 
for this in any other way except : mvuon bv ^b*? miD^m 

in the manner already stated above, -^^ pios <?p ™*d nan rwaCDZn 
viz., that the Talmud is sometimes ^ n a *ro n* *tk an tdk ,i*D3:i m» 
at variance with the Massorah. nW2 KXD3 k l, , 3 nB , pl -, B » 01D n »n m TV 

In Bereshith Rabba, Rabbi Idia L ' P » 

remarks on Psalm cv. 22, that tf* nM rt *™ ™ Da M '™ n ™ nSD 
Jfc At* is 1*, A» prtn*, without a mjW3 Y r ™ rtn Q,,PDnn P 3 *" 3 
• [t. *., in the singular], and that it nD3 » ' 3 ^"J*T"» P* 4 Snpi ma-n 
refers to Potiphera. Now the diffi- ■ rn3n ' ? *™™"i n*rrnw ,winm 
culty is, that we do not find this * :mvDnn 

omitted in any Codex ; nor is it nTO»m noa ksid nncrA fcOW 
mentioned in the Massorah magna ^pw rvnyo iran^i naia^ wna? *'nrA 
among the number of fifty- six 

passages where the i is omitted in the text and found in the Keri , M 
and there is no way of accounting for this again, except as I accounted 
for the manner of the Talmud, viz., that it disagrees with the Massorah. 
It is very suprising that we find Rashi, of blessed memory, and 
Saadia Graon, 45 giving Keris and Kethivs which are not to be found 



44 The fifty-six words which are in the textual reading without Jod (mostly indicating 
the plural) in the middle, hnt have Jod in the marginal reading, are as follows : — 

. Jerem. xv. 8 

. Jerem. xvii. 11 

. Ezek. xvii. 21 

. Ezek. xxxi. 5 

. . Ezek. xl. 26 

. .Ezek. xl. 22 

. . Ezek. xl. 22 

. Ezek. xlvii. 11 

. Hahak. iii. 14 

. . Ohad. 11 

. . Ps. xxiv. 6 

. . Ps. lviii. 8 

. . Ps. cvi. 45 

. Ps. cxlvii. 19 

. Ps. cxlviii. 2 

. . Joh xiv. 5 

. . Joh xv. 15 

. . Joh xx. 11 

. Joh xxiv. 1 

They are enumerated in the Massorah finalis under the letter Jod, p. 34 a, cols. 2 and 3 ; 
and in the Ochla Ve-Ochla, section cxxviii.,pp. 33 and 104. It must he remarked, that 
this list only registers such words as occur once as defective^ and therefore excludes 
many other words which likewise want the Jod plural, hut which occur more 
than once. Comp. also Levita's Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, p. 183, ed. Ginshurg. 

48 Saadia Oaon (pan 7TH2D) ben Joseph Ha~Pithomi, the celebrated philosopher, 
commentator, and translator of the Bible into Arabic, was born at Fajum, in Upper 



YWW . 


. Gen. xxxiii. 


4 


vw»!» 


mnjn . 


. Exod. xxvii. 


11 


wi . 


W . . 


. Numb. xii. 


3 


imno 


W3 . . 


. Joshua viii. 


11 


irrwD 


lmssnn 


. Joshua xvi. 


3 


into 


•ann . 


1 Sam. ii. 


9 


ivhm 


to . . 


. 1 Sam. ii. 


9 


vnani 


WTOttob 


1 Sam. x. 


21 


in**:*! 


W3WI . 


1 Sam. xxiii. 


5 


iriD . 


•11311 . 


. . 2 Sam. i. 


11 


T>3MJ . 


\rbyo . 


. 2 Sam. xii. 


20 


ism . 


•torn . 


. 2 Sam. xxiv. 


14 


isn . 


VTWO. 


1 Kings x. 


5 


non. 


13-Q . 


1 Kings xviii. 


42 


vm • 


1D1D2 . 


2 Kings v. 


9 


wis . 


TED . . 


. 2 Kings iv. 


34 


lpTf . 


inraio . 


. 2 Kings xi. 


18 


yvnpz 


IDS . . 


. . Isa. lvi- 


10 


into 


yyoyo 


. . Isa. Iii. 


5 


•urrn 



imiij . 


. Job xxvi. 


14 


inVanro . 


Job xxxvii. 


12 


lrrran . 


Job xxxix. 


30 


totd . . 


. .Jobxl. 


17 


1D33 . . 


Job xxxix. 


25 


rebn . . 


. Job xxxi. 


20 


rfr. . . 


Job xxxviii. 


41 


toa . . 


. Prov. vi. 


13 


irrcroa . . 


Prov. xxvi. 


24 


mrrw . . 


Prov. xxii. 


25 


131M . . 


. Prov. xxx. 


10 


mtoio . 


. Ruth iii. 


14 


vroa . 


Ezra iv. 


7 


iwon . . 


Lament, iii. 


39 


inn . . 


1 Sam. xxi. 


14 


inor? Song of Songs ii. 


11 


to? . . 


. . Ps. cv. 


40 


to . . 


. Numb, xi 


32 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



63 

in any of the Massoretic work, mra k*m nhv no a*nai *y wan* 
Thus, for instance, Rashi, of criTDa *'vi )vt?h nn ,mDDn noon idd 
blessed memory, in his commentary riDDs* ana ,'rmn D*ap -nnn piDDa D^n 
on Psalm cvliv. 2, remarks that in ^ wpai ;nnn aTO1 rnnn np n , n 
his copy ^ Ken was VH?n, wufcr parna mD3 n , n , r n t, nJ nnDDa lWW , 
him. and £fo Kethiv *flnfl under me, _,.,_ , iw ,^_ «%-,««* „(,•« -*,«,„ -,.,,*-.« 
and I caretullv looked tor it, but l ^ 

could not find it in the Massorah ' ' l l 

magnanumberedamongtheeighteen "» 1Dttn P" n ^ D Na%1 P«» ^n 
words in which the 1 is omitted at lnn2D ' nten ™ 3 ' n:31 n P "^ n ^ 1D 
the end of the word .« And this, ^z* nDDa W P 31 V^aa T" a ™ 
again, is the language of Rabbi ^ ^p 1 ,rn«xD *6i nvrwn «wtoi f?aa 
Saadia Gaon on Daniel xi. 15, " The »a^m ,mDDn nhxn D^»jn» 0*7*3 -pa 
Kethiv is 1^3*?, 0/ /iis choice, and nn wpa irvoi ,mpo Kin ]f? rrin moon 
tA« JSTm VJV3P, of his fortresses."* 7 mrma d*did3 jjki ,^d ^aa po -pn* 
Now, I carefully examined the :irvaA 

Massoretic books in all the places -ms^o ,ca*o* noa m *rpa nfc?pri3 
where the letters are changed, #PVnDa „ ^ nan L, ^-^m rrmi^n 
but could not find it ; and my 
difficulty is [to understand] how 

these Gaonim could overlook the Massorah, for, according to the 
Massorah which we have, their statements are incorrect. However, 
they [Saadia and Rashi] are much wiser then we, who are as it were 
blind men in a window compared with them. 

For some time I was in great perplexity, seeing that the Talmud 
generally ignores the Massorah, as we have shewn above in the instance 

Egypt, a. d. 892, and died in 942. It is somewhat strange that Jacob ben Chajim should 
name him after Rashi, who lived so much later. The title Gaon, which denotes 
excellency, was given to those who were the spiritual heads of the Jewish community. 

40 The eighteen words, which according to the Massorah want the suffix Vav in the 
text, are as follows : — 

. 1 Kings ix. 9 
1 Kings xii. 7 
. 2 Kings xx. 18 
2 Kings xxii. 5 
Isaiah xxxvii. 30 
Jerem. xlviii. 7 

These instances are enumerated in the Massorah marginalia, on 1 Kings i. 1 ; in the 
Massorah finalis under letter Vav, p. 27 a, col. 4 — 27 b, col. 1 ; OcJUa Ve-Ochla, section 
cxix., and Tractate Sqpherim vii. 1. It is, however, to be remarked, that Sqpherim 
only gives thirteen instances, lnnim (Gen. xliii. 28) ; isn (Judges xxi. 20) ; and nn» 
(Nehem. iii. 30), being omitted. Comp. also Frensdorff's note on section cxix., Ochla 
Ve-Ochla, p. 32, and Levita's Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, p. 117, note 69, ed. Ginsburg. 
*T It is now established beyond doubt, that the commentary on Daniel which Jacob 
b. Chajim Ibn Adonijah published in the Rabbinic Bible, under the name of Saadia, 
and which he here quotes is spurious. Comp. the article Saadia, in Kitto's Cyclopedia 
of Biblical Literature. 

K 



inmn . 


. Gen. xxvii. 


29 


lnrvan 


inn«w . 


. Gen. xliii. 


28 


irm 


•tarn . . 


. Judg. xxi. 


20 


np* . 


nton . 


. 1 Sam. vii. 


9 


mm 


iD*n 


. 1 Sam. xii. 


10 


Voni 


1DN . . 


. 1 Sam. xiii. 


19 


TIT . 



mbbm . 


. Ezek. vii. 


21 


"TO . . 


. . Dan. v. 


21 


Vm . . 


. . Ezra iii. 


2 


nnn . . 


. Nehem. iii. 


30 


nn» . . 


. Nehem. iii. 


31 


bapi . . 


. Esther ix. 


27 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



66 



of plene and defective. According to )«dt aa^a ,idtv\ a^oa hyh annana 

whom [I asked myself] are we then ^>idd n?^ new no am ,rn"in idd aina»j 

to write the scrolls of the law, since micron mnh n*nj kdhh dieA ;ntf? 

what is lawful according to the one nnKD fnDni ^na mm ido ainaj j^i 

is unlawful according to the other? mDD3 1M 1in ^ mA ^ 

At the first thought it would seem ^ / w m ^ 

that we ought to write our scrolls ' ! L 

j* x xi. m l j • a mDono rwpo am «m nana? unat 

according to the Talmud in the case Y , , , L 

of plene and ttytau*, since we n * in nDK1 ^ ,33 ^ ^ «™^ 
have taken it upon ourselves [to 3 ^ DT3 * D ^ D « " 1D ^" 1 nD *> n 
follow its authority], and since they T»f»^ K " nn ^ aD ««;^M3TOia 
[i. e., the authors of the Talmud] ^moapimppnapij^nHiio^mofinD 
were better versed in the Mossorah, tdk rra^n rnxo pno sjid moa^a pp^iai 
as well as in plene and defective, wr\ af? np»p rnn lArnD&rreKi /*jna "a« 
than we are. Nevertheless, we find pran pnn apioi f miD^rA nro o*efpo 
that Rashi, of blessed memory, ^vpxh moano np*p nap nm ,wina 
draws objections from the Mas- Np nnDOn M3 ^ Kn pDBfD |irnt AiA nro 
sorahagamst our Talmud, as in the nnin nM pprn ^^h™ m ,pnap 
caseofthesonsofEli[lSam.ii 24], n ^ nD33 nnDtn w ^ in ^ 

ana even declares that the state- i it l 

ment in the Talmud that the Kethiv hv *" *** T 00 ^ "™ <™ °*™ 
DnaWis a mistake, as we have niii»^,n«iiii-on'mirin«|nw 
shewn above. « The authors of nnTD ™ D ^ n>h * TaD »F™» nriEn 
the Tassafoth, too, raise objec- ' %rDn nD33 I 31 49 >^ wano-ia ,a>na 
tions from the Massorah against moono nt*po *nnrm ananan pnn an 
the Talmud, and make the Masso- : hyb ™n ,*ytobr\b 

rah their basis, as will be seen ,cwDn crtypm no S TD n&p N^l 
in the sequel from a quotation in map im apno ,mina p^rn p»aw pm 
Trac* Jebamoth [106 i] Now if the 

Massorah were not their basis, they would not have argued from it 
against the Talmud. But since we see that though they were later 
than the Talmudists, and yet made the Massorah their basis to argue 
from it against the Talmud, it is evident that we too must act ac- 
cording to the Massorah. And, indeed, this is the reason why the 
Codices and the corrections of the scrolls are all according to the 
Massorah; and of a truth the men of the Great Synagogue [i. e., the 
authors of the Massorah] are of great authority, and fully worthy 
that we should rely upon them. And though Rashi, of blessed 
memory, as we have seen, sides with Rabbi Meier in the Talmud, 
in the case of nhttp, against the Massorah, taking the Kethiv to be 
n'HTD, as we have stated above, 49 and in many other cases, yet we 
also see that in other places he argues from the Massorah against 
the Talmud, as I have shewn in this section. 

As to the heretics, there is no foundation in the charge which they 
prefer against us, that we have wilfully altered and changed the 
text of the Scriptures, which they derive from the removal of Vav by 



48 Vide supra, p. 57, &c. 



40 Vide supra, p. 59, &c. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



67 

the Scribes, the alterations of the ,on^n a»roi npi w ,DnDio pp^m ,onBio 
Scribes, Keri and Kethiv, &C., 80 ip»fe k^ oifnon Dn onoiD Ti&pa Km 
because by Itur Sopherim is not iop -ppa -pipa »tdid k^>k ,*i"*i mjr6 
meant that they [i. e., the Scribes] ^ W1TD DnD1D ^ Jw £ nn nDtn 
have removed the 1, but as it is W iAnDi*niDanpmrin,innrm* 
explained in the Aruch vnder to* ; ^ ww ^ ^ ^ D3 Kn 

where it is remarked Jtor Sopherim _ _ L _ ^ J. l 
denotes r^d, as the Chaldee D ' HnJ1 "P^f ™ B ^ ,' TBJ " ^ w 
renders -no, to remove [1 Kings xrfi. 'P"" 1 1in ^ «""? ™ rAnn3 » ""a™ 
44], by TD»; and so we find in ,n»pn •*»" »^ njm np nni .inpua 
(Titttn, 86, the nature of the bill of '» >in ™ TP"» - D ' M " i™ °" w i*"p 
divorce is " absolved and (TDVl), l^' Ha '•""s'B i ir " »"ai own -|<db»bi 
discharged." Now it appears that dipd pnpT 'am naoi ,pt tonna »^n 
the villagers were at first not par- ,i"'i **>^ 'p^ 11 nneio win panoa «am 
ticular in reading the Scriptures, jobb-d .o'hij "hth /majrn tik np urn 
and read "inso, and afterward [Gen. ir £ .■«» » p o^eio im 131 ^an mnn 
xviii. 5, Ps. lxviii. 26]; V&VB*, -nqp «te pfeiS w* r» inn ,»-i fxb 
and % judgments [Ps. xxxvi 7]: „„, nfe pn niK1 pnr 'ai «n«i .onsw 
they committed a blunder at that Kwn Vo«anpnnn-.j»,.» n^na^ 
time [by inserting Vav conjunctive L ' l 

in these passages], thinking that '^ * *»"' * A m ^ L ^^ " n 
these were the correct readings W^VS^^*****™* 
because they seemed to be so. ' ai ™ Dn "* w *^ * n « n 1 3n 
Whereupon the Sopherim came and «™» P wn n3 "^ ** n ^ i*P % ™i 
removed the Fav, and the reading ^P n V" ,maDn nao djt^ sum ,nD-Df? 
became again, as it originally was, ,tdk* "di spWirAi mvh w\v o-m a^> 
"|P$, afterwards, T£SK*D, tAi/ ,;w%- 

ments; and when it was seen that the Sopherim had removed the 
Vav, the words thus corrected were denominated Itur Sopherim.. Rabbi 
Isaac, therefore, came and propounded that they [i.e., these restored 
readings] are those received by Moses on Sinai [i. e., are the original 
readings]. And even up to the generations nearer that time they 
blundered and read *6), and not, with Vav [Exod. xxiii. 18], when 
the Sopherim decreed that it should be read without a Vav. 11 Thus far 
his argument. 

Thus it is evident that they [i. e., the Sopherim] made no wilful 
changes. But if they [i. e., the heretics] will persist in it in spite 
of what the Gaon [i. e., the author of the Aruch], of blessed memory 
says, we can repel them with the power of argument as follows. Can 
any man believe that if one intends to make wilful alterations and 
changes he would say, See what wilful changes I have made, espe- 

60 The heretics or Christians to whom Jacob b. Chajim refers, have taken their 
inspiration from Raymond Martin, the celebrated Spanish Dominican, who was born 
about 1220, and died about 1287. It was this distinguished orientalist, the oracle of 
the church on Rabbinical lore daring the middle ages, who boldly declared that these 
variations in question were wilful corruptions and perversions introduced by the Jews 
into the sacred text. Comp. Levita's Massoreth Ha-Massoreih, p. 45, &c, ed. Ginsburg. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



68 

ckdly in the Prophets ? Yet we ,rn*033n nana pr hii /nstnn no i*n 
find the Massorah declares " In ansiD niop ^hn pan moon \\vh rum 
five passages the Vav has been re- dk ,onaiD ppn j^d to? mine pi ,*f»D 
moved by the Scribes," &c. Again wpp no D^ao iti af? "nuer^ onjn mn 
" eighteen words are emendations 
of the Scribes/' &c. 61 Now if they had intended to make wilful changes, 

61 The eighteen Tikun Sopherim (DnDlD ppn) = Emendations of the Scribes, refer to 
eighteen alterations which the Scribes decreed should be introduced into the text, in 
order to remove anthropomorphisms and other indelicate expressions. These eighteen 
emendations (pta n **) are as follows according to the order of the Hebrew Bible : — i. 
Gen. xviii. 22, where, for the original reading omiN »3Db 1D3? *3TW STWT1, and Jehovah 
still stood be/ore Abraham, is now substituted by the decree of the Scribes = Tikun 
Sopherim, miT >3D^ *TO3? 13"ny DiTOW, and Abraham still stood be/ore Jehovah, because 
it appeared offensive to say that the Deity stood before Abraham, ii. Numb. xi. 15, 
where Moses addresses G od, " Kill me, I pray thee .... that I may not see ("jrOFil) 
thy evil," i.e., the punishment wherewith thou visitest Israel, is altered into " that I 
may not see (wu) my evil," because it might seem as if evil were ascribed to the 
Deity, iii. and iv. Numb. xii. 12, where the original reading, " let her not be as one 
dead, who proceeded from the womb of (udn) our mother, and half of (laTOl) our 
flesh be consumed," is altered into " let her not be as one dead born, ivhich when it 
proceeds from the womb of(ya») its mother has half of its flesh (ytoi) consumed ; *' 
here are two Sopheric emendations, v. 1 Sam. iii. 13, where the original "for his 
sons cursed (D*nb») God" (as the Sept. still has it ©e&v), is altered into "for his sons 
cursed (Dr6) % themselves," because it was too offensive to say that the sons of Eli 
cursed God, and that Eli knew it and did not reprimand them for it. vi. 2 Sam. xvi. 
12, where " will God see (OTn) with his eye," is altered into " will God look fava) 
at my affliction," because it was too anthropomorphitic. vii. 1 Kings xii. 16, where 
" To his God (vrftttb) Israel .... and Israel went iyrfwh) to their God," 
is altered into " To your tents ("pbrwb) Israel .... and Israel departed 
(vteiNfr) to their tents," because the separation of Israel from the house of David was 
regarded as a necessary transition to idolatry ; it was looked upon as leaving God and 
the sanctuary for the worship of idolatry in tents, viii. 2 Chron. x. 16, where the 
parallel passage is similarly altered, for the same reason, ix. Jer. ii. 11, where " m$ 
people have changed (^23) my GLORY/or an idol," is altered into "have changed (iTtaD) 
their glory into an idol," because it was too offensive to say such a thing, x. Ezek. 
viii. 17, where " they have put the rod to (»D») my nose," is altered into " they have put 
the rod to (DDN) their nose," because of its offensiveness, and to avoid too gross an 
anthropomorphism, xi. Hos. iv. 7, where " they have changed (TOD) my glory into 
shame" is altered into " I will change their glory into sham*, " (TQM ifipl DTQ3), for the 
same reason which dictated the ninth alteration, xii. Hab. i. 12, where the address of 
the prophet to God, "thou diest not" (man), is altered into "we shall not die" 
(nNM), because it was deemed improper, xiii. Zech. ii. 12, where "the apple of (>a*y) 
mine eye," is altered into " the apple of (13*3?) his eye," for the reason which called 
forth the tenth emendation, xiv. Mai. i. 13, where "ye make (WN) me expire," is 
altered into " ye weary (vvw) it," because of its being too gross an anthropomorphism. 
xv. Ps. cvi. 20, where " they have changed (»"n23) my glory into ilie similitude of an ox.' 
is altered into " they have changed (DTQ3) their glory into the similitude of an ox," 
as in Jer. ii. 11 and Hos. iv. 7. xvi. Job. vii. 20, where Job's address to God, " am I a 



Digitized by CjOOQ LC 



they would sorely not have pro- jwnna oneio pp*n j»Sd n'» ,tdAi 
claimed what they h^ax^ changed, oi^i Dn »v k^t -njn «;RrA»3D3 
and said, " Eighteen words are ncif? A rrn -jar itht ,upn 1A1 onoion 
Titan Sopherim, as given in the m % avn -^ OSD a1nan naM , , 3DD M ^ 
Mechiltha" [on Exod. xv. 7].- ro dto an :rrcn npa pi ;rwm pro 
Moreover, the Sopherim made no ^ D1 ^ Dn ^ D1 ^ XDn ^ wn 
changes nor corrections, they only _ t L L 
submitted that the text ought origi- nwAn=An ^l*«««"™« 
nally to have been so and so, but ** Dn D * '** '™ Pp ™ ** '*" 
is veiled in other expressions, out of TniD **" n ^ D ■* ' Dn3lDn "P n * "» A 
respect to t/ie Shechina, a? you will nNO DJ nxni ' Dn P 1D Q^ow naa 
find out by examining the subject. w "»* n ^* a 1^ ' D<?rn a™? 3 
The same is the case with the Keri « % » ntn ,nn* rvch tdw vtd3» ,ww 
and the Kethiv ; they [i. e., the Dn^> p* nta nan epo M ,if? iana» naa 
Sopherim] point out what they have : 2 s vnh hd 

altered, if perad venture you choose 

to characterise them as alterations ; we of the class of believers, however, 
believe that they all are a law of Moses from Sinai [t. £., the original 
readings], including the emendations of the Scribes. But even if you 
still insist that the Sopherim did make alterations, the alterations 
in question neither raise nor lower the points upon which the heretics 
rest. Consult, also, the work done for Ptolemy the king, and you will 
see that in the thirteen instances where they made changes, they 
state the reason why they have made these alterations, and what 
these alterations are in what they did for him. 58 In conclusion, the 
heretics can have nothing to say in this matter. 

burden ("fw) to thee," is altered into "so that lam a burden (^m) to myself," to 
remove its offensiveness. xvii. Job xxxii. 3, where the original, ** they condemned 
(D^W n», or pm n») God or the Divine justice," is altered into ** they condemned 
(ITU n») Job," for the same reason as the foregoing. And xviii. Lam. iii. 19, "where 
the inspired writer calls on God to remember his sufferings, and then expresses his 
conviction, " yea thou wilt remember, and thy soul will mourn over me (ty JTttfrn 
?TODd), this is altered into " and my soul is humbled within me (*«5p3 *V2 nrorn), because 
of the remark that God will mourn. These eighteen Decrees of the Scribes are 
enumerated in the Massorah magna on Numb. i. 1, and oil Ps. cvi. 20, and in the 
Massoretic work Ochla Ve-Ochlah, p. 113. The whole question of the Tihun Sopherim 
is most elaborately discussed by Pinsker, in the Hebrcio Annual called Kerem Chemed t 
vol. ix., pp. 52, etc., Berlin, 1856, and Geiger Urschrift und Uebersetxungen der Bibel, 
p. 308, etc., Breslau, 1857. 

82 The Mechiltha «nbDD is a Midrashic exposition of Exodus xii. — xxxv. 3, attributed 
to R. Ishmael ben Elisha, who flourished in the first century of the Christian era. For 
a description of the Mechiltha, as well as for It. Ishmael b. Elisha's rules of interpreta- 
tion and influence on Biblical exegesis, see Alexander's edition of Kitto's Cyclopadia, 
s. v. Ishmael ben Elisha, and Midrash. The passage referred to, is to be found in 
Exod. xv. 7, section vi., p. 47, &c, ed. Weiss, Vienna, 1865. 

68 The work for King Ptolemy, referred to in the text, is the Septuagint, in which the 
translators, according to ancient tradition, designedly made thirteen alterations, in order 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



70 

But for the men of the Great n*mrw nh*nsn no33 *m*< v1?N1 
Synagogue who restored the crown min naoa imp*i f a*ri3n3 mwvh m&vn 
to its ancient state, as it is written, 
"They read in the law of God," &c. [Nehem. viii. 8], see Nedarim 

to remove certain offensive expressions, and to prevent misunderstanding the text. 
They are as follows according to the order of Jerusalem Talmud, to which Jacob Ibn 
Adonijah evidently refers. — i. Gen. i. 1-3, according to the structure of the language, . 
and the most ancient traditions still preserved by Rashi and Ibn Ezra, is to be rendered 
" In the beginning when God created heaven and earth [t. e., the universe, comp. ii. 
1, 4], and the earth was still desolate and void, and darkness was upon the face of the 
earth, and the spirit of God hovered upon the face of the earth, then God said let there 
be light," &c. But as this presupposes the existence of primordial waters, and of a 
chaotic mass, which by the draining of the waters on the second day became the formed 
earth, it was thought necessary in translating the Bible into Greek, and in opposition to 
the Greek cosmogony and polytheism, to lay great stress on the absolute unity of God, 
and on the absolute creation from nothing. Hence the word rTONTO, had to be made inde- 
pendent of the following verses, and to be rendered in the beginning ev apx*i e'Troiijo-ev 6 0e&s, 
instead of in the beginning when. This change the Talmud indicates by the pregnant 
construction n*Wtl N*Q D*nb«, thus placing rrWQ last, and precluding every other 
translation than God created in the beginning. (Geiger, Urschrift, p. 344, &c). ii. 
Gen. i. 26, where "let us make man in our image, after our likeness," has been altered 
into " / will make man in the image, and in the likeness," to remove the appearance of 
polytheism, iii. Gen. ii. 2, where "and he ended on the seventh (^ntttt) day," 
has been changed into (TOttJTr) the sixth day, to avoid the apparent contradiction, since 
God did not work on the seventh day. iv. Gen. v. 2 (i. 27), where " male and female 
created he them " (dn*q «DnM Mil), has been altered into created he him 0*na), to remove 
the apparent contradiction in the passage where the man and woman are spoken of as 
having been created together, or simultaneously, and ii. 21-23, where the woman is 
described as having been made out of the man ; as well as to introduce into the version 
the notion which obtained among the Jews, that man was created an hermaphrodite, 
thus showing the Greeks, that the Hebrew, like their philosopher, believed man to have 
been originally androgynous (comp. Midrash Rabba, on Gen. i. 26, section viii., p. 10 a, 
ed. Stettin, 1863, with Plato, Synposion, p. 84, &c, ed. Engelmann). v. Gen. xi. 7, " let 
us go down, and let us confound " (rtal rm:), has been changed into " / will go down, 
and /will confound " (nbl*n rm«), to remove the apparent polytheism, vi. Gen. xviii. 
12, "after my decay, I had again pleasure," has been altered into ^ nirn y pbl nrw 
r?3T3?, ovttw (lev /xot y4yovev «*? tou vvv, after it had been thus with me hitherto, to avoid 
the offensive application to the distinguished mother of Israel of the expression rf?a, 
which is used for rotten old garments (comp. Geiger, Urschrift, p. 415, &c). vii. Gen. 
xlix. 6, " in their anger they slew a man, and in their self-will they hamstrung an ox," 
has been altered into " in their anger they slew an ox ("titD), and in their self-will tfoey 
hamstrung a fatted bull (Dll»), to do away with the wholesale slaughter of men. viii. 
Exod. iv. 20, "non, ass, is altered into viro£vyia, beasts of burden, because of the reluc- 
tance which the translator had to mention the name of this beast, ix. In Exod. xii 40, 
and all other lands, i. e., " the land of Canaan " has been added, in order to remove the 
apparent contradiction, since the Israelites did not sojourn four hundred and thirty 
years in Egypt, x. In Levit. xi. 6, and Dent. xiv. 7, TSiTKA = Aayo?, a hare, has been 
altered into x^poYPovAAos, porcupine, or hedgehog, to avoid giving offence to the Ptolemy 
family, whose name was Lagos, xi. In Numb. xvi. 15, ion, ass, has been altered into 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



71 

[876], w as quoted aboye, we should pa pa pis onnaa pvni ,^w D*rfa* 
have walked about as blind men, and o^in wn u ,h % yh j"p ,L ?i3i mon 
as those who are smitten with blind- ^ kxbj rvn k^i ,dhi3D3 midsi d»did3 
ness, and could not have found any ^ iv n -nn idd k^i rmo iww hdd 
correct Codex, nor any scroll of the N%n nnt ^ n L, D ^ nT ]rDn . ^ iaon ^ 
Law on which we could rely. Thus ^ w ^ ^ „„ ^ w yl%13 

we could not have known whether ^ fF ^ pTpiniAA ^ 
a word has the 1 conjunctive or not ' ' ' 

but for the Massorah, as Tossafoth V niDa ' 3 mDD,nn «*" "« ' nnDDn 
remarks on this subject in connec- 1"? *" ; 3 « ™ %a * >"**" ™ D P 1B 
tion with the Levirate law( J^amotA, *& ^nh np>h *h n**n Da nm 
106 6), where " Rabbi Abaja says na * *wwn »n % ™* w na *° ^iin'? 
the one who sends a letter of divorce ^Jna a-A imam *v* m to Aa *a* 
must not pause after the j&, not, and noa 'Da* naa *hi ,nh npoi ipDXDpi 
thus read *P|! «^5^, A* tcawte to /rar- 

/orm tfie duty o/* levir [Deut. xxv. 7], since this might convey the idea 
that he wants to marry her, &c. Now R. Ashai found R. Kahana, 
who, being perplexed about it, read *£?! HIK \h\ with 1 conjunctive ; 
where the former said to him, Have you not heard what Rabe said upon 

iiriBv^iia = ion, a desirable thing, by changing Resh into Daleth, in order not to 
mention the ass as already stated, xii. Dent. iv. 19, where the sun, moon, and the stars, 
are said to have been apportioned to the nation as objects of worship, the word tmt6 = 
iicucooTicw, to shine, has been inserted, so as to avoid the idolatry of the heathen being 
ascribed to God. xiii. Dent. xvii. 3, where we have the statement that God had not 
commanded the Israelites to worship other Gods, in accordance with Dent. iv. 19; 
it has been altered DilSb nxawf) Tm* vb TOM, which I have forbidden the nations 
to worship, to preclude the possibility of ascribing the origin of idolatry to the God 
of Israel. 

It only remains to be added, that these alterations are also enumerated in the 
Mechilta, on Exod. xii. 40, p. 19, &c, ed. Weiss, Vienna, 1865 ; and in the Babylonian 
Talmud, Megilla 9 a, where, however, the following variations occur, i. The Mechilta, 
which contains the original account, says nothing about these alterations being restricted 
to thirteen, ii. It erroneously makes alteration ii. to consist in vnpn, and not in 1N*D. ill. 
It restricts alteration vii. to D11K only ; and iv. It does not give the reason for alteration 
x., which is given in the Jerusalem Talmud. The variations in the Babylonian Talmud 
again, are as follows : i. It gives fifteen instead of thirteen alterations, adding the 
substitution of 'TDIIQMl = frrvris, for nj?3, Exod. xxiv. 5, and for fySN, ibid. xxiv. 11. 
The substitution of this Greek word in both these passages, shows that I was wrong in 
my strictures on Jacob b. Chajim's quotation {vide supra, p. 53, note 31). ii. It rightly 
gives l*na, as altera ion iii., Gen. i. 2 (v. 2). iii. It states that these alterations 
were made in the Pentateuch, and by seventy-two elders, which is not mentioned 
in the other records. Of these thirteen alterations so minutely described in these 
documents, there are only eight to be found in the present recensions of the Septuagint, 
viz., Gen. i. 1, ii. 2, xviii. 12, xlix. 6; Exod. iv. 20, xii. 40; Levit. xi. 16 (Deut. xiv. 7) ; 
Numb. xvi. 15. Comp. Frankel, Vorstudien zu der Septuaginta, p. 25, $c. ; Geiger, 
Urschrift und Uebersetzungen der Bibel, p. 439, &c, Breslau, 1857 ; Weiss, Commen- 
tary on the Mechilta, p. 19, &c, Vienna, 1865. 

M Vide supra, p. 48, &c. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



72 

this subject ? R. Kahana answered rv^ not* ,*o-n mh 10 rr 1 ? naD 16 tvh 
him, In this case Babe himself : jto ip "Von* m« *An Km mm 

yields." « Thus far. pdm t*t pzwh rm riDDinn UfOl 

Tossafoth remarks thereupon, nnoaa reiD pi f0 , rnD DnBoa 3ina 
and this is its language, " In the ^ nmmt „ na|| ^ „ ,, n ^ ^ 
correct Codices it is 16 without the DW pn ^ n3N ^ w nw 

r av, and this is also evident from , 

the Massorah [which says], «|6 ' pra "** "J 1 ™" n *? a nri0 "J" 1 
occurs three times, in conjunction P 10D ™ < D ^f ^ > 1M * " na « ^ 
with H3K, viz., Dent. x. 10, xxv. w " n2 * x ' 1 n%11DD lnw ? %3V » *?"» 
7, and'Ps. lxxxi. 12 ; and in two **^ n ^ 2 ^ D 1^» ^ wi /"**"» vfe 
other passages it commences the "pn ; HDoinn pe^ jk3 ip ,nnan m« 
verse, and is with Faw conjunctive, D'paioD wn rmoon *Mk» -p^ 3 r«n 
viz., Deut. xi. 80. and xxiii. 6.' It ,nax t^i i^ na** *6 pnp nm *^ 
also occurs in two other passages of ,m« xh 'j prm idk mioom p'trwpnDi 
the same kind, not mentioned in ^y H t, n niTaa j r , T p n3D -, n p , :D1 
the Massorah, viz., 1 Sam. xxxi. 4, m ;nDDD |%lA ^o mniw ,na* 1A1 
and Judges xi 17." Thus far ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ mDM 

the language of Tossafoth. You l 

can see ^w that if it had not ^ T J 1 ™ '^l 1 ' '^ ^ ^ 
been for the Massorah we should ^^P ,"fc ppraroimri 
not have known whether to read 16, 1K ™ lAl *^ * h l ina ™ D ^ DD n ^ 
not, or IO}, and no* [in Deut. xxv. 7]. Hn - > n>n nR1 n * ™ P 1 ' D ' 13 P 1 l Dpn 
But finding in the Massorah that n » n3n ™ *p" r *i 2mn n * 1* F*i2Mn 
njK iO occurs three times, and ana .moipn n*i ^nan n« ^nan na 
that the passage in question is ,irattA Ram -p 30 ' " 1 miDen fya v^p 
counted among them, it is evident paon D»pioD »3» prm ,un "ja *a btdi 
that the reading was not t6), and not, m mitten rwi mnai mi wan ]"*n p^n 
with Vav. Indeed innumerable ex- pBnnn D ^t, Dn ^ * plDW W1 piDD1 jn 
amplesinight be adduced which are ni , im %|nan niD ^ ^ 

like it. Again, when the Massorah 

enumerates a certain word which is in so many instances preceded by 
t6, but in none of them by *OJ, saying that this construction occurs 
so many times, we know positively that in all other places it is *01. 
Thus, for instance, it tells us that in fourteen verses occur fcft, aft), 
and tfb) 9 tfb), and vice versa; and so all the rest. . The same is also 
the case with HN and HK), in Numb. xxxi. 22, upon which the Masso- 
rites remark: "And the sign is, the gold belongs to the king," and the 
meaning is, that this passage ought to be so, for there are two passages 
which take this 1 before the second and the last nouns, whilst the re- 
maining ones have no copulative, viz., the passages before us, and Joshua 
ix. 1. Now the meaning of this [Massoretic sign] is that the gold, 
which indicates the passage beginning with but the gold [Numb. xxxi. 
22], is similar in construction, and belongs to the king, which indicates 

66 The allusion to Babe arises from the circumstance that he laid no weight on a 
panse. Compare Jebamoth, 106, b. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



73 

the passage, " and it came to pass, *m wsbtih antn m -jk 10m ptdi 
when all the kings heard " [where- pirt mn* nan -pn ,D^^on ^3 jnaeo 
with the verse in Joshua ix. 1 ujnin mai ,we^ *nnp rniDon ^pa 
begins]. From this you can see the ^> 3 ^ki .pioen ro*roi nanp ira 
beautiful and laconic style of the j rsD nin D{ ^ JTr p, in K3 , n m 1DDn 
Massorites, for thereby they make ^ >%?nBm ^ 33ni nl2DKni ^ aina 
known to us how the passage is to „ ^ TOK DK HRDinf? 
be read and wntten. If it had not t l l 

been for the Massorites, how could ' , L 

we tell, when we find it written, the I" 3 * *» "7 """^ irrB1 •"""* 
IT/ttttar, and the Anwrites, and ™ n ' M ' 3J 1*» W3 P" 1 " I" 3 <T5> 
Jta CanaaniteSy and f A0 Perizzites, whether the order is right or wrong 7 s6 
The same is the case with plene and defective, since with us the Keri 
and Kethiv are of paramount importance, although there is a dispute 
as to which of them should be made the basis [in expounding the text] ; 
e. g., in Pessachim, 16 b, where the question is about the word ^5W 

66 To understand the remark in the text, it is necessary to add to what we have 
already said upon this snbject (vide supra, p. 30, <fcc), that Ibn Adonijah alludes to 
those six verses oat of the twenty, containing the names of the Canaanitish nations, 
which are divisible into two groups, of three verses each ('a ]Q pm 'a), and which with 
the other fourteen form one rubric. They are as follows: — 

Exod. iii. 8 . . . . >Din»m inni >r»Dm noam Tinrn >3£33n 
Exod. iii. 17 . . . . >Dia*m inm >nem nowm Tinm >3?J3n 
Judges iii. 5 . . . . >Dii>m nnm T©m noum Tinn wsn 
Dent. xx. 17 . . . . ^Din^m >inn >nom >32?3:>n noam >nrm 

Joshua ix. 1 Twm inn >non >3$3an nnwn >nnn 

Joshua xii. 8 .... , »Din , m irm >r©n »3y33m no»n Tirm 
These are the only six instances out of the twenty passages which follow in definite 
order ; of the other fourteen, there are not only some which do not give all the names, 
but each has an arbitrary sequence in the enumeration. They are as follows : — 

Exod. xiii. 5 ■»Din > m mm noam »nnm >33«an 

Exod. xxiii. 23 ^Diann irm >33?3Dm mom *nnm >-ra»n 

Exod. xxiii. 28 >nnn n*i »3y33n na inn n» 

Exod. xxxiii. 2 >Din>m nrm Tiom >nnm nn»n ^aawan n» 

Exod. xxxiv. 11 >Dirm inrn ^ncm totto ^sm noan n» 

Numb. xiii. 29 warn . . . noam TnnTn >nnm 

Deut. vii. 1 *Dia*ni inm n">Dm »33?3Dpn nn«m >«>anani >nrm 

Josh. iii. 10 *Dii>m nowm TOrun nai *non rwi irm rwi »nrm rwi *a*£n n» 

josh. xi. 3 inni *nna»m mom *nrmi >"io«m >3Man 

Josh. xxiv. 11 *Dia»m inn *ttanam *nnm »3»3Dm >nDm no»n 

1 Kings ix. 20 Tnrnn irm *nen »nrm nown 

Ezra ix. 1 nnMm ^Dia^n »nDn irm >3*33b 

Nehem. ix. 8 >wr»am *Dirm »nDm no«n»nnn »33?33n 

2 Chron. viii. 7 *Dia > m >inm ^nDm noMm >nrm 

It will be seen that even in those instances where the order is the same, the use of 
the Vav conjunctive is so arbitrary, that were it not for the Massorah, which most 
minutely marks both its presence and absence; it would be very difficult to ascertain 
the correct ortnography. 

L 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



74 

[Exod. xii. 46] ; w and the similar miDi t^op pnDa ivrmrm w ,SaK* 
case in connection with the feast of nsid nsnpaVi «mp^ 10*10 "tdid maio 
tabernacles, where we have rfc&? ^im ; hdid-i nop pns nooina )**jn am 
nJ3D? nlDD5 [Succa, 6 6] ;» and fjwan p3tDpi f p, n;) ^ rnpa ?nn 
many other examples might be ^^ HDpM nrD w niD Dni 
adduced on this subject (vufe w „ 3D3 ^ QDD h Kai0 

Tossafoth on Succa). This also L ' . . ' 

obtains by the marginal readings **«.»*» « h, »' 1TOB nniDD , n 
whicharenotin the text, the KamZtz I*™" >™.™™ pn hd* hdd P *eA< 
and Pattodi, and other things of ^ ™« 12 P™ a" 1 ' : ™«** n™* 3 
a similar kind, which alter the n3 ' DD n,BfK,,,:i > D ? ,irv m=A»o rwro 
sense, and of which there are »* b' d P"W ^°oa pnoin wn ,rrpn* 
numerous examples. Again, also, a^ipn mn* TtnrA n'apn »pa ,pTpa 
in the point of the numbers of hinow ;ra ,o*pw ^a»a inai imnf? 
passages which the Massorah gives, 

saying, " There are three or four more," &c; from all this we learn 
many different laws and explanations. # Thus, for instance, when it 
is said in the Massorah on the word IVKWT5, in the beginning, that it 
begins the verse three times, viz., Gen. i. i ; Jerem. xxvi. 1, xxviii. 1; 
it throws light upon what is said in the Talmud, where it is declared 
" God wanted to reduce the world again to void and emptiness, because 
of the wicked Jehqjakim, but when He looked upon the people of his 

w As the Kethiv is b^W passive, and the Keri tatf* active, two inferences are deduced 
therefrom in the Talmud. R. Jehudah maintains that the man who partakes of the 
passover, he most eat it (tari*) in one place ("ITTN mi), but that the passover itself may 
be divided, and a part of it may be eaten by another company in another place ; basing 
his argument npon the Keri b?*i* he must eat it at one place. Whereas R. Simeon main- 
tains that the passover itself it must be eaten (bpM*) m one P lace ("ma nm), and 
cannot be divided between two different companies in different places, though the man 
himself, after having eaten his passover at home, may go to another place and partake 
of another company's passover ; basing his argument upon the Kethiv bjwj ** must be 
eaten in one place. 

68 The word TVBOl occurs three times in the Pentateuch (twice in Lev. xxiii. 42, and 
once in ver. 43) ; in two eases (Lev. xxiii. 42) it is defective, i. e., without the i, and in 
the third instance it is plene, i. e., with the V Now, upon the saying of the Rabbins 
that a tabernacle must have two whole walls, and the third may be a partial one, to be 
a legal tabernacle, R. Simeon remarks that it must have three entire walls, and that the 
fourth may be a partial one, to constitute it a tabernacle according to the law. This 
difference of opinion the Talmud explains by saying that the sages follow the spelling 
ZTOD1' rODl/ rODl, which makes four (since two are in the singular and one in the 
plural) ; one of these four represents the commandment itself, shewing that we must 
have a TOD, and the remaining three indicate the three walls, one of which is allowed 
by the Halacha to be partial. Whereas R. Simeon follows the pronunciation, which is 
alike plural in all the three instances, and hence obtains six. He then takes one of 
these three (». e., of the plurals) to indicate the commandment respecting the feast 
itself, and the remaining two plurals, being four in number, he refers to the four walls 
of the TOD, one of which may, according to the Halacha, be partial. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



75 

time, His mind was appeased : God TtnrA n'a pn »pa ,inpi na»*ro i-vnz 
again wanted to reduce the world hv mm *33D imai yrvb o^ipn ntt 
to void and emptiness, because of na»T"u irrpn*a ^anoa* p\a ,m»pix 
the people of Zedekiah's time, but rrnDDa pvu im ^jjnd V ,inm 
when He looked upon Zedekiah, pitsn p ^^ ^ an ^ l^ 
His mind was appeased" [^roc/mi, KMn ^ ^ ^ ' ^ 

17 a]. 59 Again we read m the «* ' 

Massorah/Opn, ™IA, «p«r*ri, Tl^ 3 IT" '"T T 
occurs three times, viz., Gen. i. 4, ' n * 13n nr ^ D ™ D ' J* nmDn ^ 
7; # 1 Chron. xxv. l."» Now it is l**® 1* «*■* .ya» ^ r|w «ti 
said in the Talmud, "Whoso [in the ni ^ an ? 3 * a, * n K P anrn '* 2 * ^ 
Havdalah] 61 mentions the separa- ^ D ** »™*» *^* ;&& |narx n$i 
tions [of God] must not mention ,Via*i a'ro n»cpD vSm dipd 
less than three, nor more than ,nap 'tsxioa nnvi raiwn rAnam 
seven. [Query.] To say not more 'Nxiaa m^ian nvhv nwy "]a*ri> 
than seven is right, because seven p -^nf? tik pa ,hmh vip pa ,nar 
separations are instanced, and there * » n ppt, ,p> arn Dr „ ai <» D *, : t, t, Kn&% 
are no more ; but why should there 

be not less than three ? [Eeply]. Because '1!3*5 occurs three times ; 
and as the first separation was between the Sabbath and the week days, 
therefore must the three separations be mentioned at the close of the 
Sabbath, viz., "between holy and profane,' * " between light and dark- 
ness,' ' and "between Israel and the Gentiles ; ,,6S the fourth separation 
which is mentioned on this occasion, viz., "between the seventh day and 

69 The Massoretic enumeration of these three passages suggests an explanation of the 
passage in the Talmud, where Jer. xxvi. 1 and xxvhi. 1, are connected with Gen. i. 1, 
shewing that God wished, in those cases where rvtttra is used, to destroy the work of 
the first iTttftra. May not this striking illustration also suggest the design of the 
Massorah in its first origin? 

60 The editio princeps differs from the succeeding editions in the quotations. Thus, 
for instance, the first, second, and third editions of Jacob, b. Chajim's Bible indicate 
the reference to Genesis i. 7, by quoting simply D*nrr p bw, whereas the later 
editions add ypb nnno *TOM ; whilst the third reference in the editio princeps is to 
D'ttHJ? \2Tlp prw bw, which does not occur in the Hebrew Scriptures, and has 
therefore rightly been altered in the second, third, and the other editions into 
n"a rt'iz Ni*n nun -m Vm- 

61 Havdalah nViar? is the name of the prayer which the Jews to this day offer on 
Sabbath evening, at the going out of the Sabbath and coming in of the week day. The 
last benediction in this prayer, in which occur the passages referred to in the Talmud, 
is as follows : Sntr pa *]t?nb tin pa V»nb «np pa ^inon dVot -|bn i3t6n * nn» "pa 
binb xcrxp pa bnaon » nnn yna> nu^on >n» rrcro? varan dv pa n*vsh Blessed be the Lord 
our God, king of the universe, who hast made a distinction between the holy and the 
common, between light and darkness, between Israel and the other nations, between the 
seventh day and the other six days of work ; blessed be thou, Ood, who hast made a 
distinction between the holy and the common ! 

•■ This is the reading of the editio princeps, as well as of the second and third editions, 
of the Rabbinic Bibles ; later editions have substituted msh for onab, because of the 
fear of Christians, who took it to refer to themselves. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



76 

the six days of creation," is includ- anmtsi ,h)nh imp pa Wm ,rwpDn 
ed in "between holy and profane,' * iro ^nowi pyo nowA "jidd*? na inw 
and is simply repeated in order to *^ ^ ucdi /i nma miDea jronj 
make it agree in sense with the con- D3nJ ninE) 12 p /D *d ^k rnns ♦en* ,rnnD 
eluding benediction 68 [Pessachim, nnD pa ^ ^ JWH1 >mnD -,--,., inDtyH 
103 6, 104 a]. Again we read in few ^ aM ^ Dn „ 

ttieMassorah,-n.ina,o^^, occurs ^ ^ ^ ^ 

four times, and the passages are , , ' 

Numb. xix. 15, Job xxix. Id, Psalm ™* a P : ^ * in ^ H* 1 '™V 
v. 10, and Jerem. v. 16;" and 31 P 3 T*V* ™ D * W* wi -nnD\pp 
these four correspond to the four ,ann nine *m» u«n ,rmDiB fapouni 
laws which obtain with regard to k % *i&3 apa r owi n f?apf? mn »f?a pijn 
an earthen vessel, viz., when it has nins nap U"n ,ptem^ *ivpn nine ,rm 
a hole through which the water <hs pnjn ,n*D n^aa diidi ,n^m win: 
runs into it, the law is that it iino ,jidt t^xiaa ap: ,a»:ion^ t^in 
must not be used for consecrating idi^s ,mnB inert** i:"m ,*toA Nin 
therein the water of sin-offering, 31in n ' D ^ nDn3 ^ Kwaa ^ 3W3 
thus answering to "and every open Q , ;JD , DD naTn M;1 ^p ,fc m in „ N 
vessel" [Numb. xix. 15]; yet it is DD h ^ %NnM ^^ ^ 
still a vesse with respect i to the ^ 

growing of plants. But if the hole ' 

is so large that a small root can be 

put through it, then it is clean for growing therein plants, for when a 
plant grows in a vessel which has a hole, it is no longer subject to 
defilement, thus answering to "my root is opened" [Job xxix. 19J; 
yet it is still a vessel with respect to olives. If the hole, however, is 
so large that an olive can pass through it, then it is clean [or not 
subject to defilement], thus answering to " an open sepulchre is their 
throat " [Ps. v. 10], for what amounts to eating is the size of an olive ; 
yet it is still a vessel with respect to pomegranates. But if the hole 
is so large that a pomegranate can pass through it, then it is no longer 
subject to any defilement, and thus answers to " his heap is as an 
open sepulchre" [Jerem. v. 16]; that is to say, when the vessel 
has a hole through which a pomegranate can pass, it is like a heap 
of rubbish, for it is no longer regarded as a vessel. 64 Many of the 
Massoretic signs are used for such explanations in innumerable cases ; 
some of them are dispersed through the book MordecaiJ* and in the 

68 nnTin is the reading of the first, second, and third editions of the Rabbinic 
Bibles, in accordance with the Talmud (Pessachim, 103 a), whence it is quoted. Later 
editions have erroneously nrrnD. 

64 Things in a vessel are, according to the Talmud, subject to defilement. If the 
vessel, however, happens to have a hole, then it all depends upon the size of this hole, 
the definition of which is the subject of discussion. Compare Maimonides, lad 
Ha-Chesaha, Hilchoth Kelim, section xiv., vol. iii., p. 350; ed. Amsterdam, 1702. 

65 *3TTO, Mordecai, also called ^Tton 1DD, the Booh of Mordecai, is a treatise on the 
Legal Code (rroVnn "IDD), embodying all the laws of the Talmud, which was compiled, 
revised, corrected, annotated, and supplemented by Isaac Alphasi. This Sepher 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



77 

Theological Decisions of Maharam, 66 wn ,o»:» on* ^isna poena ^d'thd 
where the latter defines what is pso | w : d» |«y ,^n*f?n ^a ♦awn ,'jiysD 
meant by the word *^3n, fo swiote r npanN in ,npap onrnf? d^d'dpi i*jd *d 
me, which the Massorah says occurs ^ ^ m -p,^ Q ^ ^vfo in ,m*y i* 
twice, viz., Song of Songs v. 7, iwnn nvnp ^ m iD nn ,wrA 
proverbs xxiii. 85 (by a comparison nTO1M a ^ ^ 

of these two passages), vide m tao ^ n nn fa ^ 

In fact, there can be no doubt that LL L ' , ' , ' » i 

whenever the Massorites state an ^ ^J*i^ » te p«n,prAi 
expression occurs 7 or 4 or 10 or «|A ^ ,* ww irrni n» ^ w 
8 times, they are designed for i™ niai P Da r™ )Ptki on»*a own 
some great purpose, and are not **w ,n^n:n mooa D*napro ♦mmi ,ra*n* 
useless. All this shews the great ynHrf? ran *n*n iton ; ww n^p:a«f 
sanctity of our holy law, and that the rrn ,m»niini )f?ia moon rofynn iran^i 
parallels are marked with a design. : -wa njpr nain anti ,^vm -pian 

Moreover, when the Massorah makes -jwmh ^i-nn n^pinn wm *a nVI"Q1 
the remark in Chaldee, there is a ^ a fWW moo, fmD p, n t, n3 mooriD 
reason for it, which will be found ^ Hi) nix imw% wama few wn m 
upon examination. For this reason ^ Dr fi -wd»» nfennn rntnim 

I have collected all that I could find f 

of their remarks in the Massoretic books which I possess, collated it, 
and put it in these twenty-four sacred books, arranging everything in 
its proper place, and I have repeated it again in the Massorah finalis, 
so that it can easily be found. Were I inclined to write more largely 
upon this subject, and to show the use of all the Massorah, and 
support it by proofs, it would occupy too much space, and the perusal 
of it would be a weariness to the flesh. 

When I saw the great benefit which is to be derived from the 
Massorah magna, the Massorah parva, and the Massorah finalis, I 
apprised Seignior Daniel Bomberg of it, may his Bock and Eedeemer 
protect him ! and shewed him the advantage of the Massorah. Where- 

Mordecai has been printed with the Sepher Ha-Halachoth, Constantinople, 1509; 
Venice, 1521 -22; Sabionetta, 1524, &c. It has also appeared separately, Venice, 1558; 
Cracow, 1598, &c. Compare Fiirst, Bibliotheca Judaica, ii., 324, &c. ; Steinschneider, 
Catalogus Libr. Hebr. in Bibliotheca Bodleiana, 1669, &c. The work derives its 
appellation from the author, whose name was Mordecai b. Hillel, and who was martyred 
at Nurnberg, 1810. 

66 OYTID, Maharam, is the acrostic of *VMQ yyn Win, our teacher the Rabbi Meier. 
This R. Meier b. Barnch, who was born 1230, and died 1293, was one of the most 
distinguished Jewish literati during the middle ages, and the first official chief Rabbi in 
the German empire, to which dignity he was nominated by the Emperor Rodolph I., of 
Hapsburg. He had his seat and college at Rottenburg-an-der-Tauber, whence he is also 
called Meier of Rottenburg, or Meier Rottenburg. His Theological Decisions, or 
Questions and Answers (niawni irfoitt), have been published at Cremona, 1557; 
Prague, 1603. He also wrote Commentaries on the Massorah (n*lDO TttQ), which are 
still in MS. in the public libraries. Compare Fiirst, Bibliotheca Judaica, iii., 176, &c, 
Graetz, Oeschichte der Juden, vol. vii. ; p. 183, &c; Leipzig, 1863. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



78 

upon he did all in his power to »Br6 ,m W:n i^k hzs m W? irp *xdnd 
send into all the countries in order h>tb n^nrn f mDDno «xa«w no te 
to search what may be found of the i»fi<M» no moan neon u*r^ if?:foro 
.Massorah; and, praised be the & m f ^ m ^ n3t:n ^ ^^ nn L, 
Lord, we obtained as many of the an| ^ awi ^ 

Massoretic books as could possibly n , m L w _ «-,„«, „™ ^^-. ,',.1 
be got. The said gentleman was °™ '° nBDn ^? J™ ™» 
not backward, and his hand was not QfnM1 Dnirn QMr * *™ ™ 
closed, nor did he draw back his : ViW D1 P D taai 

right hand from producing gold out ™ i:anm "Wi ^m wn» in*0 
of his purse to defray the expenses °*mtn /riona o^atoab D«mn ; ona ■ 
of the books, and of the messengers u " n ' nD DBf 1* ^ ^ on» r w "V 
who were engaged to make search ^la^arn mioan f?pa k*3d rvrn? D^piDBn 
for them in the most remote corners, -Qna rww oneon onia *a ,om nw h)im 
and in every place where they might moa naina moon row af? ,a»aD moon 
possibly be found. n»on moan? )rm,TiDpa ivrw d^ddh 

And when I examined these Mas- pe^ ^re "irwn piapa o*piDD nw w 
soretic books, and mastered their ^^ Tanm ^ ^Vrrn w wm 
contents, I found them in the ^ ^ m mmi ^ ^ Dnm 

IS?. ^f5. Confu r n ^ so arm -p -nn -Ya w -p 1*1 <*a'a 
much so that there was not a sen- ' ' 

tence to be found without a blunder, that is to say, the quotations from 

the Massorites are both incorrect and misplaced ; since in those copies 

[of the Bible] in which the Massorah is written in the margin, it is not 

arranged according to the order of the verses contained in the page. 

Thus, for instance, if a page has five or six verses, the first of which 

begins with "IOKJI, and he said, the second with 1|!J, and it was told, 

the third with HT1, and this, the fourth with n?B>*l, and he sent, the 

fifth with 3KW, 'and she sat, the Massorah begins with n^»1, the 

fourth verse, "the word n&ty occurs twenty- two times j" 6 * then 

follows verse two, "the word ijJJ occurs twenty-four times;" 68 and 

•* The instances in which ntoto is the Piel, future, with Vav conversive, are the 
following: Gen. viii. 7, 8, 12; xix. 29 ; xlv. 24: Exod. xviii. 27 : Numb. xxii. 40: Josh, 
xxiv. 28 : Judges ii. 6 ; iii. 18 ; xv. 5 : 1 Sam. x. 25 ; xi. 7 ; xxx. 26 : 2 Sam. iii. 21 ; 
xviii. 2: 2 Kings v. 24; xvii. 25, 26; xxiv. 2 : Psalm cvi. 15. In the Massorah marginalia 
on Gen. yiii. 7* where the instances are enumerated, twenty-one only are given, and 
there are no more to be found in the Bible, though the Massorah, like Ibn Adonijah, 
states that there are twenty-two, unless we include in this rubric TJ9&) (Exod. vi. 11), 
with Vav conjunctive. It is moreover to be added, that there is evidently a misprint in 
the Massorah, where we have TDlb vhW), a second time instead of mm n» ifron (Gen. 
viii. 12). 

68 The twenty-four instances in which T3M, Hqphal, future, with Vav conversive, are 
as follows : Gen. xxii. 20 ; xxvii. 42 ; xxxi. 22 ; xxxviii. 13, 24 : Exod. xiv. 5 : Josh, 
x. 17 : Judges ix. 25, 47 : 1 Sam. xv. 12 ; xix. 19 ; xxiii. 7 ; xxvii. 4 : 2 Sam. vi. 12 ; 
x. 17 : 1 Chron. xix. 17 : 2 Sam. xix. 2 ; xxi. 11 : 1. Kings i. 51 ; ii. 29, 41 : 2 Kings vi. 
13 ; viii. 7 : Isaiah vii. 2. They are enumerated in the Massorah finalis, under the 
letter He, p. 22 b, col. 4. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



kxd» pi ,Dira» rnjn *n*on ,roa im» 
ix>Dnnty ^ntsm Nnpon ma^ao aina 



79 

then ^<? //tft verse, " the word Drains rn cam ,pp*ni itd *^a 6 » i'o 
2#01 occurs fifteen times," 68 without nnwDto n»n lAr ij ,onvxi nnppa 
any order or plan. Moreover, most nrrn iDion nana *a /iai dip jno pnf> 
of these [Massoretic remarks] are Qi) ;na rp f„ ran f, *<„ irn > nD mD ^ 
written in a contracted form and pa ^ 1M „ nn y „ a vn ^ Da Mm 
with ornaments, so much so that ^ ^ 1Dn D <, <, m nQ ^ 

they cannot at all be deciphered, <, ^ 

as the desire of the writer was only • ¥ „ n i ' 

to embellish his writing, and not to '" ,na * **» P* DD ™ ^ ™ DD 
examine or to understand the sense. 5 1WW n »»7 7 a n:nri f Dn * ™P& I 31 
Thus, for instance, in most of the >™ n ^ 3 >™ h:in m « w*T*ai 
copies there are four lines [of the Ppwn "no f?p rrnoan f?a dt^> nf?nna 
Massorah] on the top of the page, cman ^ rn» moon neoa wen a'mo 
and five at the bottom, as the writer ,hopan a*ao aina irnv nt> rfw izh 
would under no circumstances dimi- na -nxpm tdidhd aiWi crcw maipaa* 
nish or increase the number. Hence, rApo^ **i nBDDa vim* ,nmtyn wwni 
whenever there happened to be any f rnoDn mana vpao w*n m f noof? 'm 
of the alphabetical lists,™ or if the mDtf rnmpaai ,»:jj f?p ojpna 
Massoretic remarks were lengthy, 
he split them up in the middle, or at 
the beginning, and largely intro- 
duced abbreviations, so as to obtain 
even lines. Now, when I observed 

all this confusion, I bestirred myself in the first place to arrange all the 
Massoretic notes according to the verses to which they belonged, 
and then to investigate the Massoretic treatises in my possession, 
apart from what is written in the margin of the Bibles. Whenever 
an omission or contraction occurred [in those copies of the Bible 
which had the Massorah] in order to obtain even lines, or four lines 
[of Massorah] at the top [of a page in the Bible] and five at the bottom, 
I at once consulted the Massoretic treatises, and corrected it according 
to order. And whenever I found that the Massoretic treatises differed 
from each other, I put down the opinions of both sides, as will be found 
in the margin of our edition of the Bible published by us, with the Masso- 
rah, 71 the word in dispute being marked to indicate that it is not the lan- 

69 The instances in which ytdPH occurs, are as follows : Gen. xxi. 16 (twice) ; xxxi. 34 j 
xxxviii. 11, 14 ; xlix. 24 : Josh* vi. 25 : 1 Sam. i. 23 : 2 Sam. xiii. 20 : 1 Kings ii. 19 : 
Bath ii. 23, 14. They are enumerated in the Massorah marginalia, on Gen. xxxviii. 11, 
and on 2 Sam. xiii. 20, where it is distinctly stated that there are only twelve instances } 
and indeed there are no more to be found in the Hebrew Scriptures. The statement, 
therefore, in the text, that there are fifteen such instances, which is to be found in all 
the editions of Jacob b. Chajim's Introduction, must be a slip of the pen. 

70 By Alphabetic Massorah is meant, a certain number of exceptions, or peculiar 
forms of words, which come under the same rubric, and are arranged and enumerated 
in alphabetical order. 

71 Hence the Massorah thus put in the margin obtained the name Massorah 
marginalis. 



Digitized by 



Google 



80 

gnage of the Massorah ; and when- wn *a rovia .nwAen f?p *npj miooa 
ever I took exception to the statement imp niDipoa pi ;miDDn hvz p»^D 
of a certain Codex of the Massorah, t<bv ,moDno int* ibd pe>^ hy *H rwp 
because its remark did not harmonise rnooai ,DHDon ana maia ksid wn 
with the majority of the copies of n^p^ wp n , n ^ nrw IDwa nnrw 

the Massorah, whilst the same dim- mw ^ „~ _ m ™ M »,-,,^ *«.* nmM . 
,, .' « n . ,, ,, .mpn n*rw in xptin nnntD rap rrra 

culty was not found in the others, i ^ r 

or whenever it contradicted itself, » ip pin * "n 

or where there was a mistake, I l* 'P SDa wn ™ n niD1 P 0:n '^ 
made a careful search till I dis- n,yao ainD ***' ™*° 'P in P w nCD 
covered the truth, according to my P™ n * ni n»Bin» m paiai onwp 
humble knowledge ; but sometimes DcnlBD m " ia:3 ^ >™ ^ W 3 P "TO noa 
I had to leave it in uncertainty, and nn;nai : ia popna 'ma rmra >n f?af? 
for this reason there will be found ^12* Ti"ra -we^ rrn ^ na»piDBn 
many such in the margin of the onppn hz pv wra p dn n^k n*:n^ 
Bible which we printed. The Lord neo »W*o /30D d^jn n? ,hd ^ panai 
alone knows how much labour I nan nari ^wrnpnp i&v mpan nrw 
bestowed thereon, as those wiU ffw D , panil 10aa m 1WD £ anp ^ 
testify who saw me working at it n h ^ w ^ 

As to the revision of the verses, it ^ n>3a J 

would have been impossible for me L L L 

to do it correctly without knowing ** « im ' n ^ * w ^ra raaaa rrn 
the whole Scriptures by heart, and ^ 301 '" n P n an3Dn ""P fa TP° »T 
this is far from me. But for a ^ 1£n D * ? D nana * n P n arDDn ^ 
certain book called Concordance, *"*» ^ D * ^ p*" 13 * r^ nc »™ D P 
the author of which is the learned "P^> Tien ik ,-jai -p ptd nam na^nn 
R. Isaac Nathan, 78 who lived some onia w*xai ,*pi -ja dptdi ,D*»*n -pi 
forty years ago, published in our «*a: *?ai ,ranDi nana fa npifaa oovxn 
printing-office at Venice, I could o»n na»n faai ,nvmD -pi -p^ ,a»a3i 
not have corrected the verses. This 1tt ; a 1M ^ p 1DB3 ^ D p, Da KSDn nm 
is a precious work; it embraces ; *punn ^d* nfaaa rpn nt naDa* ,'^> 
all the points of the Holy Bible, ^ , n w /n A ^ ^ ^ 

and explains all the sacred Scrip- l 

tures, by statmg all nouns and verbs r ' ' L 

with their analogous forms, and "l™ °«" *» ' ra3 *™ > r • r » a ' > 
giving at the heading of every noun 

and verb an explanation, saying the meaning of the word is so and so, 
and branches out in such and such a manner, and comments upon each 
one separately. It also marks the division of each chapter, and the 
number of chapters in every prophetical book, and tells in which 
chapter and verse every word occurs, i. e., verse 4, 20, or 80, thereby 
any word wanted may easily be found. And if a verse has four or 
five verbs or nouns, e.g., T1TP? **7J ^? ! J> i> n the shadow of mine hand 
[Isa. li. 16], you will find it quoted under ?tf, shadow ; under 1J, hand ; 
and under HD3, to cover ; so that if you only remember one word in the 

W For B. Isaac Nathan, see Kitto's Cyclopedia, 8. v. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



81 

verse, whether verb or noon, you kw nm* na»n dk »a ,pi^ -ran in jpdo 
will easily find the required passage -jppiao ttv&n e\sn ,piDDno or w fyiD 
under the root of the verb or noun. rAvui ; tonn o^n 1** ,^jnon en»a 
The advantage to be derived from jrfon ,n^an p«f? iddh m nf?jnrn n^po 
this book is indescribable ; without ^o»o^ miot>a yyh fn ptt npfcn 
it there is no way of examining the rpa% ]npatw - n3f %3 -^ -pre diddh 
references of the Massorah, since mi%uwm , h l,. %k> „~-J„ w,,--*, !,,«- 
one who studies the Massorah must ^ "^ 

look into the verse which the Mas- ? PI™ 

sorah quotes, and which without a fa "P*" T» nrr A*" >,on "* nrna 
concordance would take a very long ™ ?™ «TP» •»** ^ ^ ,«^n 
time to find, as you might not know *"«* " T* I* ^ n? idd j^w 
in which prophet the passage refer- rmm ^V *p& w«n ia ir *a ,«pn 
red to occurs, and if you knew the ;nna iv w iA ,mp»n *piDD ^>ao oipo 
prophet, you might still not know no r\wyb hw »n«n *A mpb nan rpo 
the chapter and verse. Besides, all : wkw 

the world is not so learned in the io*Dinf? ai n*n imo&n *a Willi 
Scriptures. Whosoever has this jm vmamaaw mpoa npon a»ao Aa 
concordance does not require any mm DpD 1irar A wn ^ /lt DpD ^ 
more the lexicon of Kimchi, for it Q ^ ^ m ^ ,a'a on nfei ni pm 
contauis aU the roots whereunto ^ 

is added an index of all the verses . L l 

in the Bible: none of them is ^ * >™ **»™ "P "« W» 
wanted. In conclusion, without it *™ w * >™« **» ^ T™* 
I could not have done the work J ™ ™a "»» * in ' nan:3 ? 3 * r*™ 
which I have done. ** «^ 3 ^ bAvui Drw ^ivq d**3»i 

Seeing that the Massorah was nty^D f?aa **» ,oys> n'a icaa imoaa 13 
too large to be printed entire in uAd a»a:ia tdeo ama *n«n dk ,rwiDi 
the margin, I have not repeated nm iAv ,»TDDna nap axr rrn ,ia^ 
the Massoretic remark after it has nvn ^^ «vipa qk *a ttixtA mivDtta 
been given once. Thus, for in- ^ ^p a t, D 1W d n«ro ,ia fp ppan 
stance, nw»i, and A* Mnt 9 occurs ^ aw ^, rnDn npi^na rDwrt fianxin 
twenty-two times: I enumerated ^ %% »,« w „„«- „.!„ ,„, _„ .„- „„,« 
the passages m the remark on the r r ' r 

words nfe*1 [Gren. viii. 8], and when I afterwards came again to the word 
nS&"1> hi another place, I did not repeat all these references, having 
given them once before, but simply said the Massoretic remark will be 
found in section Noah. 78 As the prophetic books are large, every pro- 
phet having on an average twenty-five chapters, my labour would have 
been in vain if I had simply said the word is found in such and such 
a prophet, since the reference could not be found without great exertion, 
and the student would soon have grown weary and left it off alto- 
gether. I have therefore adopted the division of the chapters which 
B. Isaac Nathan made, and said it occurs in such and such a prophet, 

78 n: is the title of one of the Sabbatic lessons, comprising Gen. vi. 9-xi. 33 ; vide 
supra, p. 8, § xiy., note 12. 

W 



Digitized by 



Google 



82 



*nan*in 



ibv 



: ^nib^d 12m) nanpn 



and in such and such a verse. Had ,^s |»*oa ,^0 N'asa noo: *nanai 

I at that time the Massoretic divi- npi^n nxid w*n i^ni ,ia mippT ]ynb 

sion of the chapters on the whole f mpon ^aa moon ^pa ip^nt? nvenen 

Bible I would have preferred it, but |!in ^ 1D naDD ^nsyn 1 ? yen inr 'irfl 

I did not get it till I had almost ^rx naae> m^b n* njran -p -iron 

finished the work. I have, never- l.l m ,«. -, ^,, m -l ~- u ^i,*-, 
.,, i !• i -i ., ,1 ^a? ,K»n dj no'Din? *mDN /frown 

theless, published it separately, so 

that it may not be lost to Israel. 

To make the Massorah perfect, I . . . 

was obliged to rearrange the Mas- P" ' nW ™ DDn "P ™ ™ h ' )P nf? 

sorah magna, for it was impossible *' n ^ ' nDD D1Bf MD n ° ,B "™ nnerDna 

to print it in the margin of the ,»»» nnpnyna rwrnoi ,nain nmora 

Bible, for it is too large ; I have uoBirw no *?a pi : na amp f it ipnf? 

therein adopted the alphabetical 'icrono i3"m paini on»pn a»aD moano 

order of the Aruch, to facilitate the nniN mam *mtn n^iun *6 ,n*p*DKn 

reader. Moreover, all that we have *Si ,T,nyn roa tittd* nhun moan ny 

printed of the Massorah magna in a>r0 p i3 fD , pnD , rin DN , 3 ^an 1 ? %nwi 

the margin of the Bible, I have also l, d pi ^ D ?a , M ^ H ^ in nDD3 , D 

repeated a second time in the Mas- „,„-- nk> l wv >- . ^.-l .,„ ^^m^ -,* 
^ , „ ,. i • i T i P'pon on won nao? nn bebop no 

sorah finalis, which I arranged ' 

alphabetically according to the ex- 
ample of the Aruch, but did not 
give it again entire ; I have only 
repeated the beginning of the re- 
marks. Thus, for instance, I said ^^ ™ BN: > n*n **> nn ?* w ^ w "i 
"the word n&»1 occurs fifteen times, vn dn» ,cp miN*? -\»v tvntf i*?ia miDon 
as you will find in such and such a ik "t dhb *naan ,miorA ma*n '♦ M"w 
prophet and passage;" the same p^oni ,rropn ami pror? ,ann *?p 'n 
is the case with other observations ,oqi3 naa in** mpoa on dn jjt n^ 
which I have omitted, and this I 
have done designedly. Let an 
illustration suffice. If the student 
will examine a page of a prophetical 
or any other book of the Bible, he 
will find that it has generally ten or 

eleven verses ; that there is not a verse which is without a Massoretic 
remark on a word or more, and that the Massorah parva notes every 
word upon which there is any Massorah, and says it occurs four, 
thirteen, or fifteen times ; and that it was impossible to print the whole 
Massorah which belongs to that page ; hence, when there are ten 
words on it which belongs to the Massorah, I only give four or five 
at most [in the Massorah marginalis], as the space of the page does 
not admit of more. Now the student, not knowing whether it is given in 
another place, or where to look for it, might think that this Bible has 
not all the Massorah which belongs to it. I have therefore been obliged 
to indicate in the root of the word in the Massorah magna, in what 



ik '♦ en niDyn iniaa ,mf?n ik K*aaa p»y* 
rrnn *bv pro* xb pwe ^aa ,D*piDa k'* 
njDp moorn ,miDO na yw na*n la 
maun ,ht.dd na -pm> nan ^aa nti 



,DDipoa oppa^ na Dn oipo nr«ai 
*?a nt pan«i nn^pa \w la^a awnn 
ywb 'roivin pb ,ia yw miston 
nr»a ,Nnan mooa N^nn na»nn vivz 



Digits 



zed by G00gle 



88 



TDB3 ,Tiopn ma^ao aina D*Dys> nam 
arm mooa 
nop inn* 1 ? do"p rnp n'ai 
nanrn jjp ,aoipoa QD*Din^ ws^a 
f p»Dn hz ^ano pop rvn mopm mitk 
vrw ,Nnan moDn mn'*a tts^a pi 



part it is printed in such and such jai ,^b p'oa ,^b *ra:a ddij Dipo 

a prophet, and with what sign. I mm D»o*Dion lawn nioipu nanna 

have also been obliged to repeat -»Dyn nrrA Dnf? jmw na*D^ d'3D'dhd 

and state in the Massorah finalis wnm pisnn naafTD 1 ? jnw yna "in* 

m ^ ° f * he M assoretic remarks ^ p ^ nf?n: m3 marAl -, 1?rA 

which the former editors have omit- 

ted in sundry places, because the ^ ^ 

page happened to be just as large , , ' 

aif was required for printing the ™ ** "" D5 > im,A M " 

other matter. You therefore find 

it many a time stated in the margin 

of the Bible [i. e., Massorah margi- 

nalis], the Massorah on this passage nnDoa noyn a*ao 'nana ,iinya nw 

is in the Massorah finalis. Wher- mooa idb3i , s yhz a'a p in am ,nt 

ever, also, the Massoretic remarks w\v jnsn f?a^ /ai^D ma nanpoa anal 

belonging to a certain page were so waneo rnerA p**i ; ppaf? )»ynh mio 

numerous as to render it impossible f < a p fc, llt ^ ^ K1DW nDD3 ma ain a 

to give them in their proper place, ^ai , a n ^ a p , , a D%atea pi /tl w 

which was too narrow, or wherever nr ^ Q ^ ^ %a nn nTOa a . a 

there were the alphabetical remarks 

* +1. tit T ,.T\ ainan o'ainam ovarii minn 

01 the Massorah magna which be- , , , » 

longed to the sausage, I always P 1 W hn A W ? hn ™ m P»P> 
noted in the margin, "This is one of P n * ro n:n "* » w ^ n ' ni Q, f D 
swcfc and such an alphabet, and is ^ -™™ 1D * "T I™ 1 WD n ^ Dn 
woted tn the Massorah finalis under ™* d^di nip^na wansM* nnND 
swcft «i?d swc/i a letter," so that the TiDipn inN aina*? thdk ,awnp3ipn 
student may easily find it. And d^w ,Mn dtooti mpi^nn ^>a dnt 
you must not be astonished to find naa ,m:pa p*o nm ddbo HDDina 
in the Massorah such language as, <nmpn in* d<dbi3 one? nrwo )pn^» f?av 
" It is noted in second or ^rs* , 3DEnn np ^ m np ,L, n fc a m Y aai ,na? 
Samuel, ^or second Kings, or ««xm<2 ^^ ^ip ?1T D ^ 1%w ^ 
Chromcles, or to see Ezra and 
Nehemiah separated ; for the author 
of the Concordance, who divided 
the law, prophets, and hagiographa 
into chapters, also divided Samuel, 
Kings, and Chronicles respectively into two books, and denominated 
Ezra the first ten chapters of the book, and the rest of the book he 
called Nehemiah ; and as I have adopted the division of the Concord- 
ance, I thought it advisable to append to the end of this intro- 
duction a list of all the chapters, with the words with which they 
begin, and of their number in each book ; so that if there crept in any 
mistakes in printing, they may easily be rectified by this list, printed at 
the end of the Introduction. We have printed in this Bible the num- 
ber of every chapter, in order that the student may easily find the 
passage when the Massorah says, " It is noted in such a chapter." 
Behold, I have exerted all my might and strength to collate and 



jo^Da noD3 miDDa ini^wa ,it*piaD 
♦nai **tikd ^aa 'jdd po: *h run 



Digitized by 



Google 



84 

arrange the Massorah with all the ,o*3ip*nn f?aa moon jprAi r\wyb 
possible improvements, in order ,minoi rna rrvwn^ na i»b*n» 
that it may remain pure and bright, naio »a ,rw m on»m o»Dpn mmrAi 
and show its splendour to the na- a wnK nfyin wniA nn ,a>n «hb 
tions and princes; for, indeed, it nDWm wnpn 13 * n -nn rnKDm >-w* 
is beautiful to look at Tbswasa ^ ^ r n ^ niKn niN ^ 
labour of love for the benefit of our 

brethren, the children of Israel, and * ™"» ™ '™ in ™' > %ma » 
for the glory of our holy and per- P 1 ' wn f nf?nj nn / n 1DDD » * *> 
feet law, as well as to fulfil as far mijw jpA ra *drd fa ™» w«*» 
as possible the desire of Don Daniel W w» n nww noai pvexv noa 
Bomberg (may his book protect w^j *^ »w^ ^af? ^jnn<?i ww n»b 
him !), whose expenses in this mat- *b % yyb nr* *a ,ain mien taea iina 
ter far exceed my labours. And as w*n *b) ,y*pa ;n epina jn yzwb «nro 
regards the Commentaries, I have wnai *xan *a inf?w /np^> nWa oipf? 
exerted my powers to the utmost ^pn nasAc roaten rv!?an nrn-A rum . 
degree to correct in them all the fD ^ vn f?i WmrA *»♦? t»k ,nman nan** 
mistakes as far as possible ; and . ^ nail3 t, , n t, H ,t, m3T 

whatsoever my humble endeavours " '' 

could accomplish was done for the glory of the Lord, and for the 
benefit of our people ; and I would not be deterred by the enormous 
labour, for which cause I did not suffer my eyelids to be closed long, 
either in the winter or summer, and did not mind rising in the cold of 
the night, as my aim and desire were to see this holy work finished. 
Now praised be the Creator, who granted me the privilege to begin 
and to finish this work. Kemember me, my God, for good ! Amen. 



Digits 



zed by GoOgle 



85 



INDEX I. 



PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE REFERRED TO. 





Genesis. 




Chap. 


Ver. 


Page. 


Chap. 


Ver. 


Page. 


Chap, 
i. 


Ver. 


Page. 


xliii. 


28 


65 


xxvii. 


15 


63 


1 71 


74,75 


xlv. 


24 


78 


.. 


27 


62 




1-3 


70 


xlix. 


6 


70,71 










2 


71 


# # 


24 


79 




Numbers. 






4 


75 








i. 


1 


69 




7 


75 




Exodus. 




v. 


13 


54 




26 


70 


iii. 


5 


73 


. , 


14 


54 




27 


70 


# , 


8 


73 


vii. 


1 


.' 59 


ii. 


2 


70,71 


. . 


17 


73 


xi. 


15 


68 




21-23 


70 


iv. 


19 


53 


, . 


32 


64 




22 


70 


. . 


20 


70,71 


xii. 


3 


64 


y. 


2 


71 


vi. 


11 


78 


.. 


12 


68 


vi. 


7 


70 


xii.-xxxv. 3 


69 


xiii. 


29 


73 




9 


81 


, . 


40 


70.71 


xvi. 


15 


70,71 


viii. 


7 


78 


.. 


46 


73,74 


xix. 


15 


76 




8 


78,81 


xiii. 


5 


30,73 


xxii. 


40 


78 




12 


78 


. . 


16 


61,62 


xxvii. 


11 


62,63 


xi. 


7 


70 


xiv. 


5 


78 


xxix. 


19 


60 




33 


81 


XV. 


7 


69 




31 


60 


xii. 


1 


45 


xviii. 


27 


78 


.. 


33 


60 


xiv. 


2 


45,54 


xix. 


22 


53 


xxxi. 


2 


49 




8 


45 


xxiii. 


13 


67 


. . 


22 


72 


xvii. 


19 


16 


.. 


19 


15 










27 


45 


. . 


23 


73 


Deutebonom 


r. 


xviii. 


5 


49,67 


.. 


28 


73 


i. 


1 


50 




12 


70,71 


xxiv. 


5 


53,71 


iv. 


19 


71 




22 


68 


. , 


11 


58,71 


v. 


31 


49 


xix. 


29 


78 


xxvii. 


11 


64 


vi. 


4 


59 


XX. 


5 


54 


xxix. 


29 


31 


, . 


8 


61,62 


xxi. 


16 


79 


xxxiii. 


2 


73 


. . 


9 


59 


xxii. 


20 


78 


xxxiv. 


11 


73 


vii. 


1 


78 


xxiv. 


14 


45 


xxxix. 


12 


62 


X. 


10 


72 




16 


45 








xi. 


13 


59 




28 


45 




Leviticus. 




. . 


18 


61,62 




55 


45,49 


i. 


1 


SO 


. , 


21 


59 




67 


45 


ii. 


15 


54 


. , 


30 


72 


XXV. 


6 


59 


X. 


16 


15 


xiv. 


7 


70,71 




27 


62 


xi. 


6 


70 


xvii. 


8 


71 


xxvii. 


19 


16 


. . 


Id 


71 


XX. 


17 


73 




29 


65 


,. 


39 


54 


xxii. 


15 


45 




42 


78 




42 


15 


. , 


16 


45 


xxxi. 


22 


78 


xii. 


5 


15 


. . 


19 


45 




84 


79 


xiii. 


10 


54 


. , 


20 


45 


xxxili. 


4 


64 


# # 


21 


54 


. . 


21 


45 


xxxiv. 


3 


45 


, . 


33 


15 


. . 


23 


45 




12 


45 


xiv. 


12 


31 


. . 


24 


45 


xxviii. 


11 


79 


XV. 


10 


57 


. . 


25 


45 




13 


78 


xvi. 


31 


54 


, . 


26 


45 




14 


79 


xxi. 


9 


54 


,. 


27 


45 




24 


78 


xxiii. 


42 


74 


. , 


28 


45 


, , 


25 


54 


.. 


43 


74 


.. 


29 


45 



Digitized by 



Google 



86 



Chap. 


Ver. 




Page. 


Chap. 


Ver. 


Page. 


Chap. 


Ver. 


Page. 


xxiii. 


6 




72 


xxi. 


14 




64 


Chronicles. 


XXV. 


7 


71 


,72 


xxiii. 


5 




64 


xix. 


17 


78 


xxviii. 


27 


45,51 


,63 


, . 


7 




78 


XXV. 


1 


75 




30 


45 


51 


XXV. 


29 




11 


xxix. 


16 


54 


xxxiii. 


27 


. 


53 


xxvii. 


4 




78 








xxxiv. 


12 




5 


XXX. 


26 




78 


2 


Chronicles. 


xxxyiii 


30 




63 


xxxi. 


4 




72 


viii. 
x. 


7 
16 


73 
68 




Joshua. 






2 Samuel. 






xix. 


17 


78 


iii. 


10 




73 


i. 


11 




64 








vi. 


25 




79 


ii.. 


19 




79 




Ezra. 




viii. 


11 




64 


iii. 


21 




78 


iii. 


2 


65 


ix. 


1 


*72 


73 


vi. 


12 




78 


iv. 


7 


64 


X. 


17 




78 


viii. 


3 40 


,49 


,50 


ix. 


1 


73 


xi. 


3 


. 


73 


X. 


17 




78 








xii. 


8 


. 


73 


xii. 


20 




64 




STehemiah. 




xvi. 


3 




64 


xiii. 


20 




79 


ii. 


6 


51 


xxiv. 


11 


'30 


73 


. . 


21 




50 


iii. 


30 


65 


# # 


28 




78 




33 


'40 


,50 


. . 


31 


65 










XV. 


31 




40 


viii. 


8 


48,70 




Judges. 




xvi. 


12 




68 


ix. 


8 


73 


ii. 


6 




78 


, , 


21 




50 


X. 


1-10 


37 


iii. 


5 






73 


. . 


23 


40 


,49 








9 . 


18 






78 


xviii. 


2 




78 




Esther. 




ix. 


25 






78 


. . 


20 


40 


,50 


ii. 


9 


59 


. . 


47 






78 


xix. 


2 




78 


ix. 


27 


65 


X. 


13 






40 


xxi. 


11 




78 








xi. 


17 






72 


xxiv. 


14 




64 




Job. 




XV. 


5 






78 


XXX. 


83 




40 


vii. 


20 


68 


xvi. 


31 






58 










xiv. 


5 


64 


XX. 


13 






50 




1 Kings. 






XV. 


15 


64 


xxi. 


20 






65 


i. 


1 




65 


XX. 


11 


64 










. . 


51 




78 


xxiv. 


1 


64 




KUTH 






ii. 


19 




79 


xxvi. 


14 


64 


ii. 


11 




49 


. . 


29 




78 


xxix. 


19 


76 


m m 


14 


. 


79 


. . 


41 




78 


xxxi. 


11 


54 




23 


# 


79 


ix. 


9 




65 


.. 


20 


64 


iii. 


5 


40,49 


,50 


, , 


20 




73 


xxxii. 


3 


69 


. . 


J2 


40,49 


50 


X. 


5 




64 


xxxvii. 


12 


64 




14 




64 


xii. 


7 




65 


xxxviii. 


41 


64 


•• 


17 


40*, 49 


50 


xvii. 


16 
15 




68 
54 


xxxix. 


26 

30 


64 
64 




1 Samuel. 




xviii. 


42 




64 


xi' 


17 


64 


i. 


9 


16,25 


xxii. 


44 




67 










23 




79 












PS.ALMS. 




ii. 


9 




64 




2 Kings. 






V. 


10 


76 


. . 


24 


57,' 58, 66 


iv. 


84 




64 


xxiv. 


6 


64 


iii. 


13 


. 


68 


v. 


9 




64 


xxxvi. 


7 


49,67 


v. 


6 


45,51 


63 


, # 


18 40 


* 49 


,50 


xlv. 


10 


34 




9 


45,51 


63 


. . 


24 




78 


lviii. 


8 


64 




12 


45,51 


63 


vi. 


13 




78 


lxviii. 


26 


49,67 


vi. 


4 


45,51 


63 


. , 


25 




51 


lxxiii. 


16 


54 


ma 


5 


45,51 


63 


viii. 


7 




78 


lxxvii. 


38 


15 


., 


17 




63 


X. 


27 




51 


lxxx. 


14 


15 


vii. 


9 






65 


xi. 


18 




64 


lxxxi. 


12 


72 


X. 


21 






64 


xvii. 


25 




78 


cv. 


22 


64 


9 . 


25 






78 


, . 


26 




78 


. . 


40 


64 


xi. 


7 






78 


xviii. 


27 




51 


cvi. 


15 


78 


xii. 


10 






65 


xix. 


31 




40 


. . 


20 


68,69 


xiii. 


19 






65 


, , 


37 


40 


50 


. , 


45 


64 


XV. 


12 






78 


XX. 


18 




65 


cxliv. 


2 


65 


xviii. 


5 






64 


xxii. 


5 




65 


cxlvii. 


19 


64 


xix. 


19 






78 


xxiv. 


2 




78 


cxlviii. 


2 


64 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



87 





Proverbs. 






Jeremiah. 


Chap. Ver. 
xl. 26 


Page. 


Chap. 


Ver. 


Page. 


Chap. 


Ver. 


. P T2 




64 


vi. 


13 


64 


i. 


5 


xlvii. 11 




64 


xxii. 


25 


64 


ii. 


11 


68 


xlviii. 16 16 


40 


,49 


xxiii. 


35 


77 


. , 


24 


57 








xxvi. 


24 


64 


iii. 


2 


45, 61, 63 


Daniel. 






XXX. 


10 


64 


v. 


16 


76 


v. 21 




65 


•• 


17 


34 


XV. 

xvii. 


8 
11 


64 
64 


xi. 15 




65 


ECCLESIASTE 


3. 


xxvi. 


1 


74,75 


HOSEA. 






ii. 


11 


64 


xxviii. 


1 


74,75 


iv. 7 




68 


V. 


9 


54 


xxxi. 
xxxviii. 


38 
16 


40, 49, 50 

40,50 


Obadiah. 






Song op Sonc 


*s. 


xxxix. 


12 


40,50 


..11 




64 


ii. 


11 


64 




14 


26 








v. 


7 


77 


xlviii. 


7 


65 


Habakkuk. 












1. 


29 


40, 49, 50 


i. 12 




68 




Isaiah. 




Ii. 


3 


40,50 


iii. 14 




64 


vii. 


2 


78 














xiii. 


16 45 


, 51, 63 


Lamentations. 


Zechariah. 






XXX. 


33 


54 


iii 


19 


69 


ii. 12 




68 


xxxvi. 


12 


51 




39 


64 


xiv. 2 


45 


51 


Xxxvii. 


30 


65 














. , 


32 


50 




Ezekiel. 


Malachi. 






xlii. 


24 


34 


iii. 


12 


50 


i. 13 




68 


xlviii. 


8 


26 


vii. 


21 


65 








Ii. 


16 


80 


viii. 


17 


68 








Hi. 


5 


. 64 


xvii. 


21 


64 








lyi. 


10 


64 


xxxi. 


5 


64- 








lvii. 


2 


36 


xl. 


22 


64 









Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



88 



INDEX n. 

TOPICS AND NAMES. 



Ababbanel, see Abbavanel. 

Abravanel, his opinion about the origin 
of the Keri an&Kethiv, 44-47, refut- 
ed by Jacob b. Chajim, 50-52, 54. 

Abja, Rabbi, 63, 71. 

Aboth d' Rabbi Nathan, 54. 

Achah, Rabbi, 58, 71. 

AdelkinD, Cornelius, 10. 

Ain, the middle letter in the Psalms, 15. 

Aklba, Rabbi, 60. 

Alashkar, Moses b. Isaac, 2. 

Alton, Chajim, 4, 38. 

Anthropomorphisms, removed from the 
text, 68. 

Abama, 10. 

Abuch, the, 40 ; different editions of, 41, 
49, 51, 67 ; its definition, Itur Sophe- 
rim, 67, 82. 

6 

Ben-Asher, 7. 

Ben-Naphtali, 7. 

Benjamin of Tudela, 41. 

Bebeshtth, Rabba, see Mldrash. 

Bible, the Rabbinic, description of, 6, &c, 
21, 40. 

Bomeerg, Daniel, establishes a Hebrew 
printing office at Venice, 4 ; his great 
expenses and work connected with 
the Rabbinic Bible, 8, 9, 41, 77, 78 ; 
engages Levita as corrector of the 
Hebrew works, 9; his publications, 
10; suppresses Jacob b. Chajim's 
name in consequence of his embrac- 
ing Christianity, 11, 14 ; parts with 
Jacob, 13. 

Buxtorf. 35. 



Cassel, David, 10. 

Charles V., 9. 

Christians charging the Jews with wil- 
fully altering the text, 42 ; refutation 
of the charge, 66-71. 

Codices, three, of the Temple, and their 
readings, 52, 53. 

Cobeot, Moses de, 10. 

Crowns, Book of, 61, 62. 



Delitzsch, 24. 
Derenburg, Dr., 



E 

Egidio, de Viterbb, Cardinal, befriends 
Levita, 9. 

Elders, 37. 

Ellezeb, Rabbi, 53. 

Ephodi, his view of the origin of the Keri 
and Kethiv, 42, 43 ; refuted, 55. 

Ersch and Gruber's Encyklopadie, 10. 

Etheridge, Dr., 41. 

Euphemisms, substituted for cacopho- 
nous expressions, 51, 63. 

Ezra, author of the Keri and Kethiv, 
44-47. 



Ferrer, Vincente, preaches persecution 
of the Jews, 2. 

Ferreras, 3. 

Frankel, Vorstudien zu der Septua- 
ginta, 71. 

Frensdorfe, Dr., 11 ; his edition of the 
Ochla Ve-OcUa, 25, 26; declares 
that the Ochla Ve- Ochla is not the 
same as that used by Jacob b. Chajim, 
27, 28. 

Fuerbt calls Jacob b. Chajim Tunisi, 1 ; 
erroneously asserts that Jacob b. 
Chajim's Introduction was published 
in English, by Eennicott, 6; his 
opinion about the date of the edition of 
Jacob b. Chajim's Treatise on the 
Targum, 10 ; his enumeration of 
Jacob b. Chajim's works, 10, 14; 
he regards the Ochla Ve- Ochla as 
lost, 25. 



Gaon, 65. 

Geiger, his opinion on the Commentaries 
ascribed to Ibn Ezra, 7 ; his descrip- 
tion of the Massorah, 15 ; his charges 
against Ibn Adonijah of suppressing 
the materials, 17; refutation of the 
charges, 18-23 ; strictures on Frens- 
dorff's remarks on the OcJda Ve- 
Ochla, 26 *, his fixing the date of the 
Ochla Ve-Ochla, 34; Urschrift und 
Uebersetzungen der Bib el, 49, 53, 69, 
70, 71. 

Gershon b. Jehodah, 24. 

Gerundensis, Moses, see Nachmanides. 

Graetz, Oeschichte der Juden, 24, 57. 



Digits 



zed by G00gle 



80 



Halle MS. of the Massorah, described 
28-80; its relation to the printed 
Massorah of Jacob b. Chajim, 30, 31; 
to the Ochla Ve-Ochla, 31-33; its 
date, 34. 

Hannael, Rabbi, 48. 

Haphtaba, see Pentateuch. 

Heretics, see Christians. 

Hunnah, Joshua, 57, 59. 

Hupfeld, his description of the Halle 
MS. Massorah, 28. 

Havdalah, 75. 



Ibn Adonijah, see Jacob ben Chajim. 
Ibn Aknin quotes the Ochla Ve- Ochla, 

24, 25. 
Ibn Chabib. Jacob, 10. 
Ibn Ezra, 6, 7 ; commentaries ascribed to 

him, which belong to Moses Kimchi, 

7 ; his rendering of Gen. i. 1-3, 70. 
Ibn Shemtob, 10. 
Ida, Rabbi, 64. 
Ika, Rabbi b. Abaja, 48. 
Isaac b. Jehndah quotes the Ochla Ve- 

Ochla, 24, 25. 

b. Moses Ha-Levi, see Ephodi. 

b. Asher, 57. 

Rabbi, 48, 57. 

Ishmael Rabbi, 39, 53, 60, 61, 69. 
Itur Sopherim, 42, 48, 49, 67, 68. 



Jacob b. Chajim, also called Ibn Adonijah, 
and Tunisi, probable date and place 
of his birth, 1, 2; emigrates from 
Tunis, 4; becomes connected with 
Bomberg, edits the Babylonian and 
the Jerusalem Talmuds, 1, 5, 38 ; the 
Hebrew Concordance of Nathan, the 
Jad Ha-Chezaka of Maimonides, 5 ; 
publishes the great Rabbinic Bible, 6; 
his treatise on the Targum, 9, 12, 13; 
his name suppressed, 11, 36 ; embraced 
Christianity, 11, 13, 14, 36; his death, 
14 ; his description of the state of the 
Massorah, 19 ; the relation of his re- 
cension of the Massorah to the Ochla 
Ve-Ochla, 25-28; his labour con- 
nected with the Massorah, 20, 34, 35 ; 
refutes Abravanel, 48 ; his opinion of 
the origin of the Keri and Kethiv, 56. 

Jabchi, see Rashi. 

Jehtjdah b. Nathan, called Riban, 57. 

b. Bethara, 60. 

Rabbi, 74. 

Jews persecuted in Spain, 2. 

Jonathan b. Uzziel, 6. 

Joseph the Blind, 7. 

E 

Kabbalah, the, studied by Christians, 
4, 9. 



Kahana, Rabbi, 71, 72. 

Kennicott, edits a Latin version of Jacob 

b. Chajim's Introduction, 6. 
Keri, the, always followed in reading the 

Scriptures, 44. 
Keri and Kethiv, 40 ; its origin, 42, 69, 73 ; 

number of in each book of the Hebrew 

Scriptures, 47, 48. 
Keri velo Kethiv, 40, 49, 55 ; number of, 

60. 
Kethiv velo Keri, 40, 47, 49, 55 ; number 

of, 50. 
Kmcm, David, 6, 7 ; quotes the Ochla Ve- 

Ochla, 24, 25 ; his opinion about the 

origin of the Keri and Kethiv, 43, 44 ; 

refuted, 55. 
Kimchi, Moses, author of commentaries 

ascribed to Ibn Ezra, 7. 



Lebrecht regards the Ochla Ve-OcUa 
as lost, 25. 

Letter, the middle in the Psalms, 15. 

Levi b. Gershon, see Ralbag. 

Levtta calls Jacob b. Chajim Ibn Adoni- 
jah, 1 ; teaches Christians, 4 ; writes 
an epilogue to the Rabbinic Bible, 9 ; 
praises Ibn Adonijah; loses all his 
property at the sacking of Rome; 
goes to Venice, 9; his revision of 
works, 10 ; abuses Jacob b. Chajim 
for embracing Christianity, though he 
praises his literary works, 11, 23; 
his opinion about the duration of the 
Massorites, 15 ; his description of the 
state of the Massorah, 19, 20 ; affirms 
that the present compilation of the 
Massorah made by Jacob b. Chajim 
is chiefly from the Ochla Ve- Ochla, 
23-25, 26-28. 

Luzzatto, 10 ; his declaration that Jacob 
b. Chajim did embrace Christianity, 
11-13. 

M 

Maharam, see Meier of Rottenburg. 

Maimonides, his legal code called Jad 
Ha-Chezaka, 5, 59 ; his More Nebu- 
chim, 52. 

Martinez, Fernando, preaches persecu- 
tion of the Jews, 2. 

Massorah, 14; its meaning, 15; origin 
and import, 15-17; its condition, 7, 
8, 19, 41 ; its utility, 72, &c. 

finalis, 6, 7, 40, 41, 82, 83. 

magna, 6, 16, 40; divided into 

two parts, 32, 83. 

• marginalia, 6, 19, 40, 79, 83. 



parva, 6, 16, 18, 40. 

the Great, 24 ; how treated by 

the Scribes, 78, 79. 
Massorites, their duration, 15, 16. 
Massoretic order of the Books in the 

Bible, 26; treatises, 16, 17, 78. 



Digitized by 



Google 



90 



Massobetic sign explained, 72, 73. 
Mechilta, 10, 69, 71. 
Meier, of Rottenburg, 77. 
b. Samuel, 57. 

Rabbi, 59, 60. 

Michaelis, 35. 

Midrash Rabboth, 10, 59, 64. 
Ruth, 37. 

Tanchuma, 10. 

Tilim, 10. 

Mishrachi, Elias, 10. 
Moors, crusade against tbem, 2. 
Mordecai b. Hillel, 76, 77. 
Morinus, 35. 

Moses, the Punctuator, or Ha-Nakdan, 
7, 18. 

b. Nachman, see Ramban. 

Mezuzah, 59. 

Mozabquiveb captured by the Spaniards, 



N 

Nachhanides, see Ramban. 
Nathan, Isaac, 5, 80, 81. 

b. Jechiel, 41. 

Navarro, Pedro, conquers Bugia, 4. 
Nehemiah, Rabbi, 53. 
Neubaueb, 24. 
Nobzi, Salomon, 24, 25. 



Ochla Ve-Ochla, origin of its name, 16, 
17, 19 ; declared by Leyita to be the 
basis of the present Massorah, refuted, 
23, 24, 26, 27; whether it is the 
identical one quoted by Eimchi, Ibn 
Aknim, Isaac b. Jehudah, Elias 
Levita, 25; is edited by Dr. Frens- 
dorff, 26;. its relation to the Massorah 
of Jacob b. Chajim, 25-27; to the 
Ochla Ve-Ochla quoted by the medi- 
aeval lexicographers, 28 ; its age, 33, 
34; Frensdorff s edition quoted, 45, 
49, 50, 51, 64, 65, C9. 

Onkelos, 6. 



Papa, Rabbi, 59. 

Paris Massorah, edited under the name 

of Ochla Ve-Ochla, see Frensdorff 

and Ochla Ve-Ochla. 
Pentateuch, the, divided into Sabbatic 

lessons, the manner in which it is 

quoted in Jewish writings, 45. 
Pesicta Sutrata, 10. 
Phylacteries, 61. 
Pinskeb, 69. 

Pizzightone, David de, 5. 
Platc, 70. 

Poltolott, Complutensian, 3, 22. 
Pbebcott. 8. 

Prophiat Duran, see Ephodi. 
Ptolemy, king, 69. 



Rab, 48. 

Rabe, 71, 72. 

Rabbinic Bible, see Bible. 

Ralbag, also called Rabbi Levi b. Ger- 
shon, 6, 7, 10. 

Rambam, see Maimonideb. 

Ramban, also called Moses b. Nachman, 
or Nachmanides, 10, 39, 40, 56. 

Rashba, 55. 

Rashbam, 89, 40, 57. 

Rashban, also called R. Samuel b. Meier, 
39, 40, 57. 

Rashi, 6, 7, 24, 34, 49, 50, 51 ; his inter- 
pretation of 1 Samuel ii. 24; differs 
from the Massoretic text, 57-59, 60, 
61, 63, 64, 65, 66, 70. 

Raymond Martin, 67. 

Re dak, see Kimchi. 

Reformation, 6. 

Reifmann, his opinion on the commen- 
taries ascribed to Ibn Ezra, 7. 

Riba, see Isaac b. Asher. 

Riban, see Jehudah b. Nathan. 

Rossi, Azzariah de, his date, calls Jacob 
b. Chajim Ibn Adonijah, 1. 

Rottenburg, Meier, 76. 

Rules, exegetical, 60-63. 

S 
Saadia Gaon, 7, 34, 64, 65. 
Sabba, Abraham, 10. 
Sabbatical lessons, see Pentateuch. 
Saccutto, Abraham, 2; emigrates from 

Tunis 4. 
Salomon, b. Abraham b. Adereth, 10. 

b. Isaac, see Rashi. 

b. Jehudah, see Norzi. 

Samaritans, the, refuse to adopt the revi- 
sion of the text, 53. 

Samuel, b. Meier, see Rashbam. 
Mar, 59. 



• Rabbi, 57. 



Scribes, see Sopherim. 

Septuagint, the, 69. 

Shtmshon b. Abraham, 12. 
. Simeon, Rabbi, 74. 

Simon, the Just, 37. 

b. LaMsh, 52. 

Siphra, 10. 

SlPHRI, 10. 

Soave, Moses, 12. 

Sopherim, the origin of their name, 15, 
43 ; members of the Great Synagogue, 
37 ; authors of the Keri and Kethiv, 
43; their emendations of the text, 

42, 48, 49, 67-69. 

Spain, expulsion of the Jews from, 2. 

Steinschneider, 10, 17, 24, 41. 

Synagogue, the Great, its origin and con- 
stitution, 37; the members thereof, 
the compilers of the Hebrew canon, 
the Book of Esther, &c, 37, 38 ; the 
authors of the Keri and Kethiv, 42, 

43, 70. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



91 



Tam, 57, 62, 63. 

Tagin, Sepher, see Book op Crowns. 

Talavera, Fray Fernando de, 2. 

Talmud, the, eaitio princeps of, 5 ; its ex- 
planation of Nehemiah viii. 8, 48; 
differences between it and the Mas- 
sorah, 42, 57, 58, 63, 64, 65; the 
different Tracts of it quoted : — 
Baha Mezia, 54 6 . . . 62,63. 



BabaBathra, 111. 
Erechin, 17 a . . 
Gittin, 86 . . . 
Jebamoth, 1066 . 

13 6 . 

Jerusalem. 

Kethuboth, 104 a . 
Eiddnshin, 30 a . 
Megilla, Jerusalem, 

9a . . . 

246 . . 

256 . . 

Menachoth, 34 a 6 
Maccoth, Jerusalem, 
Nedarim, 37 6 . . 

57, 70, 71. 
Nidda, 33 a . . 
Pessachim, 166 . 
• 1036, 



Bosh Ha-Shana, 4 
Sabbath, 55 6 . . 

1036 . 

Sanhedrin, 46 . 
Shebiith, Jerusalem, 
Sopherim vii. 1 . 

vi. 4 

vi. 8 . 

vi. 9 . 

vii. 2 . 



63. 

. 74,75. 

. . 67. 

66, 71, 72. 

. . 53. 

6 . 53. 

. . 36. 

. . 15. 

. 53. 

. 71. 

. 63. 

45, 51. 

59, 61, 62. 

ii. 7 . . 39. 

48, 49, 55, 



11 



104 



52 



57. 
74. 
75, 76. 
. 32. 
57, 59. 
. 60. 
. 60. 
. 37. 
. 65. 
53, 55. 
. 50. 
. 50. 
. 53. 



Sopherim viii. 8 

ix.9 

Sota, 20 a . . 
Succa, 66. . 

466. . 

Taanith, 46 . 
Taharoth . . 
Zebachim, 246 
115 6 



45. 

51. 

39. 

74. 

61. 

61. 

12. 

62. 

53. 

Mishna, xiv. 4 . 53. 

Tikun Sopherim, 42 . . . 48, 68, 69. 

Tossafoth, 57, 58; mentions variations 

between the readings of the Talmud 

and the Massorah, argues from the 

Massorah against the Talmud, 60-63, 

71, 72, 74. 

Tunis, the supposed birth-place of Jacob 

b. Chajim, 2, 8. 
Tunisi, see Jacob b. Chajim. 



Vav, the middle in the Pentateuch, 15. 
Verse, the middle in the Pentateuch, 15 ; 
in the Psalms, 15. 

W 

Weiss, his commentary on the Mechilta, 

71. 
Word, the middle in the Pentateuch, 15. 



Ximenes, Cardinal, goes to Granada to 
convert the Mussulmans, 2 ; causes the 
destruction of Arabic MSS, 3; trium- 
phantly enters Oran, 4; does not 
describe the materials used in the 
Complutensian Polyglott, 22, 23. 



Zunz, 24, 41. 



D. MARPLES, PRINTER, LIVERPOOL. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



WORKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR. 



THE SONG OF SONGS, with an Historical and Critical 
Commentary. — Price 10s. London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer. 

" Its poetical beauty has certainly not been impaired in Mr. Ginsburg's 

hands Much of what Mr. Ginsbnrg has done is so good, and the 

class of works so completely deserves encouragement, that we shall be glad 
if the success of his first effort encourages him to continue his biblical 
labours." — Saturday Review. 

" Whoso is tempted by its luscious light, streaming through laden vine- 
boughs, ' dripping odours, dripping wine,' that would gaze on the tessellated 
floors of ivory palaces, and pierce through silken lattices into chambers 
dedicated to a bridal, that would crush spikenard and musk under his feet, 
and listen to the voice of bridegroom and bride, let him turn to these pages, 
and leara all the curious lore which a sedulous and erudite scholar has 
amassed to illustrate this new translation of the story of the Shulamite."— 
Athenaum. 



pOHELETH, commonly called THE BOOK OF ECCLE- 

VJ SIASTES, Translated from the Original Hebrew, with a Commentary, 
Historical and 'Critical. — Price 18s. London : Longmans, Green, Reader, and 
Dyer. 

"Anything so complete and important has never appeared before in 
our language upon the Book of Ecclesiastes. We can readily understand 
that the author has bestowed seven years' labour upon it ; and we cannot too 
strongly praise his diligence, research, and learning." — Clerical Journal. 

" A valuable contribution both to its exegesis and its literary history. 
. . . The opinions of so competent a Hebrew scholar as Mr. Ginsbnrg 
cannot be consulted without profit, even though they may not be correct in 
every instance." — The Literary Churchman. 

" The notes are replete with good sense as well as learning, and the main 
points for discussion are brought out in the introduction with a clear and 
masterly hand."— The Spectator. 

" The work is the acutest, the fairest, the most learned, every way the 
ablest and most trustworthy work on Ecclesiastes in our language, and 
perhaps the best in any language." — The Critic. 

" This is one of those learned efforts of Biblical criticism into which the 
laborious intellect of Germany has for some time thrown itself with so 
much earnestness of purpose."— -John Bull. 



THE ESSENES; THEIE HISTOEY AND DOCTEINES. 
An Essay, Reprinted from the Transactions of the Literary and Philoso- 
phical Society of Liverpool. — Price 2s. London : Longmans, Green, Reader, 
and Dyer. 

" This is certainly a very good account of that remarkable sect, whose 
peculiarities elicited a measure of admiration even from the Greeks and 
Romans, and exercised some influence upon Christianity. Dr. Ginsbnrg 
is of opinion that the common sources of information are not ample enough 
to enable us to understand sufficiently ihe doctrines and habits of the 
Essenes; and accordingly he professes to furnish a more complete and 
accurate account, founded upon his researches among ancient and modern 
authors."— Enjlish Churchman. 

" Dr. Ginsburg's paper on The Essenes, their History and Doctrines. . . 
is an exhaustive essay, on a subject on which it is curious that there should 
be so much obscurity."— Quardian. 

" The book will be valuable as a manual for reference, in consequence of 
its numerous facts; and students of Hebrew and Christian antiquities 
should have it at hand."— Journal of Sacred Literature, 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



WORKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR-Cont.nued. 



I^HE KABBALAH : its Doctrines, Development, and Litera- 
ture. An Essay read before the Literary and Philsophical Society of 
Liverpool, October 19, 1863, and reprinted with the Society's permission. — 
Price 7s. 6d. London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer. 

THE MASSORETH HA-MASSORETH of Elias Levita, 
in Hebrew, with an English Translation, and Explanatory Notes. — 
Price 21s. London: Longmans. 1867. 

" The work will be a welcome addition to the libraries of all sound 
Hebraists, and we should be glad to hear that its laborious editor was 
engaged on a scientific treatise, making the whole subject of Massoretic 
criticism available to European scholars."— The London Review. 

" Dr. Ginsburg's translation of El* as Levita on the 'Massoreth,' is a work 
of the greatest utility to the Hebrew student." — Westminster Review. 

" The Introduction by Dr. Ginsburg is exceedingly interesting, and very 
valuable in the present state of Hebrew literature in this country. We have 
here the history of the life and times of Elias Levita, and a most instructive 
risume of the literature of that period. The translation is free, easy, 
natural; the notes are brief , pointed, practical, and give evidence of the 
most comprehensive and detailed acquaintance with the whole subject. 
Several important errors are corrected, which mar even our most recent 
authorities. We feel assured that many Hebrew scholars, who have hitherto 
been satisfied with modern scientific helps, will gratefully avail themselves 
of the present means of making their acquaintance with the old native 
authorities, and that as many as will make the attempt will not be disap- 
pointed." — The English Independent. 

" We must heartily thank Dr. Ginsburg for this befitting companion to 
Jacob ben Ghajim, and the Kabbalah. The value of the volume before us is 
greatly enhanced by the fact that the present is the only reliable and com- 
plete translation of the work ; the two which exist, the one in Latin, and the 
other in German, being exceedingly imperfect. The Introduction is replete 
with the most valuable and interesting information. We have a concise and 
clear account of the life and times of Elias Levita, and a most instructive 
re'mmS of the literature of that period. It furnishes numerous corrections 
of errors which mar some of our most recent information upon the subjects 
in hand. The translation is clear, easy, and natural. Shemitio scholars, 
who have hitherto been satisfied with modern scientific aids, by the help 
furnished them here will be able successfully to wade through the intricacies 
of the old native authorities. . . . We feel assured that the present work 
will be a most welcome addition to the library of every sound Hebraist."— 
British Quarterly Review. 

" We offer hearty thanks to Dr. Ginsburg, who gives us bocks that can 
bring no adequate reward to their author, but can and will establish his 
claim to the remembrance and gratitude of scholars < universally."— The 
Nonconformist. 

" Such scholarship as Dr. Ginsburg's will always be rare : it requires 
historical and other conditions which are not often to be found together. 
All the more highly let it be set store by when it does present itself. For 
ourselves, we are grateful to Dr. Ginsburg both for Lis ttudies and for the 
fruit of them ; and we receive his English Levita as one of the best con- 
tributions which recent years have made to the cause of Hebrew learning 
and of Old Testament criticis.n, whether in this or any other country."— 
The London Review. 

JACOB BEN CHAJIM'S INTRODUCTION TO THE 

J RABBINIC BIBLE, Hebrew and English; with Explanatory Notes. 
Second Edition, much enlarged. — Price 7s. 6d. London : Longmans, Green, 
Reader, and Dyer. 

" This is a valuable and curious contribution to Biblical literature." — 

Clerical Journal. 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 




Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle 



Digiti 



zed by G00gle